similar to: [LLVMdev] Unresolved symbols: LLVMInitializeARM64*

Hi I install the CPOS-7-Installation-20141120-1.ISO on the AIX power 720 (CentOS power PC version for the AIX power serices) Then I saw a message below Please wait, loading kernel. :0,/vmlinux: Unable to open file, Invalid device Boot: How can I boot it up? Please give me an advice . Thanks Sean

Building on OS X 10.7.1 with the standard toolchain, I have seen the following linker warnings going back a number of versions in trunk whenever I build an executable linked with LLVM: ld: warning: direct access in llvm::fouts() to global weak symbol llvm::formatted_raw_ostream::~formatted_raw_ostream() means the weak symbol cannot be overridden at runtime. This was likely caused by

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19356 Summary: DPMS does not turn off LCD backlight on NV34M [GeForce FX Go5200] Product: xorg Version: unspecified Platform: PowerPC OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau

On 28.12.2011, at 19:02, Jonathan Ragan-Kelley wrote: > Building on OS X 10.7.1 with the standard toolchain, I have seen the > following linker warnings going back a number of versions in trunk > whenever I build an executable linked with LLVM: > > ld: warning: direct access in llvm::fouts() to global weak > symbol llvm::formatted_raw_ostream::~formatted_raw_ostream()

On Jul 10, 2009, at 3:05 PM, David Greene wrote: > Here's the first of several patches to get comments into asm > output. This one > adds comment information to MachineInstructions and outputs it in the > generated AsmPrinters. This includes TableGen work to trigger the > comment > output in the right places. A couple of things are important to discuss: +

Here's the first of several patches to get comments into asm output. This one adds comment information to MachineInstructions and outputs it in the generated AsmPrinters. This includes TableGen work to trigger the comment output in the right places. Please review and comment. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was

On Sunday 12 July 2009 18:56, Chris Lattner wrote: > A couple of things are important to discuss: > > + dynamic_cast<formatted_raw_ostream &>(O) << Comment(*c); > > We're trying to eliminate rtti, please don't add new uses of it. > Switching all of the asmprinter to statically use > formatted_raw_ostream would be appropriate. To separate comments,

On Sunday 12 July 2009 18:56, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Jul 10, 2009, at 3:05 PM, David Greene wrote: > > Here's the first of several patches to get comments into asm > > output. This one > > adds comment information to MachineInstructions and outputs it in the > > generated AsmPrinters. This includes TableGen work to trigger the > > comment > > output

Hi,all I ran my generated whole-program bitcode file which performs as a bodytrack tool, it can give me the right result but with a stack dump before it exsits Update Error : Model observation failed for time : 1 Error loading observation data terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::bad_cast' what(): std::bad_cast 0 lli 0x08b713d2 1 lli 0x08b71247

On Friday 11 December 2009 11:35, Chris Lattner wrote: = > > I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not ok to convert code under > > DEBUG() or #ifndef NDEBUG to use dbgs()? > > Right. > > > Then what's the point of providing it? > > I don't know what dbgs does, so I don't know! dbgs() will be a circular-buffering raw_ostream, meaning it saves

Hi Nan Zhu, > I use Bugpoint to check it , Bugpoint gives me the following information: > > > Read input file : 'bodytrack.bc' > *** All input ok > Initializing execution environment: Found gcc: /usr/lib/ccache/gcc > Running the code generator to test for a crash: <cbe>*** Debugging code > generator crash! > > Error running tool: >

On Dec 11, 2009, at 9:44 AM, David Greene wrote: > On Friday 11 December 2009 11:35, Chris Lattner wrote: > = >>> I'm not sure what you mean here. It's not ok to convert code under >>> DEBUG() or #ifndef NDEBUG to use dbgs()? >> >> Right. >> >>> Then what's the point of providing it? >> >> I don't know what dbgs

Hi, I'm embarrassed that I can't figure this out... I have a compiler that outputs my module in either .s assembly format or .obj binary format, either one works just fine. But if I try to output both of them by adding passes, LLVM throws an Assert: void WinCOFFStreamer::EmitLabel(MCSymbol *Symbol) { assert(Symbol->isUndefined() && "Cannot define a symbol

Hello, I want to write a modulePass in addPreEmitPass() for NVPTX, but I encounter an assertion failed when executing clang. Here is my error message. ==== Pass 'NVPTX Assembly Printer' is not initialized. Verify if there is a pass dependency cycle. Required Passes: llc: /home/pyyu/local/llvm/lib/IR/PassManager.cpp:637: void llvm::PMTopLevelManager::schedulePass(llvm::Pass*): Assertion

On Friday 18 December 2009 13:53, David Greene wrote: > > > + void releaseStream() { > > > + // Delete the stream if needed. Otherwise, transfer the buffer > > > + // settings from this raw_ostream back to the underlying stream. > > > + if (!TheStream) > > > + return; > > > + if (DeleteStream) > > > +

On Jul 13, 2009, at 9:31 AM, David Greene wrote: >> A couple of things are important to discuss: >> >> + dynamic_cast<formatted_raw_ostream &>(O) << Comment(*c); >> >> We're trying to eliminate rtti, please don't add new uses of it. >> Switching all of the asmprinter to statically use >> formatted_raw_ostream would be

On Jul 13, 2009, at 10:02 AM, David Greene wrote: >>> - Tag instructons with source line information (customers really >>> want this). >> >> Right, that would be nice. This should be synthesizable from the >> DebugLoc on the instruction in the asm printer, no need to >> redundantly >> encode it into the comment field. > > Except the DebugLoc

Hi Jakob, I have been trying to learn how the CodeGen passes work and I am playing around with the -debug-pass option. I tried implementing a bare CallGraphSCCPass based Pass in the CodeGen which basically does nothing for now. I mostly tried to replicate what RegAlloc passes do. I did this instead of modifying the existing RegAlloc passes to use CallGraphSCCPass because that was becoming way too

On Oct 31, 2012, at 1:41 PM, Madhusudan C.S <madhusudancs at gmail.com> wrote: > I have spent last 4 weeks trying to figure out how to implement > Interprocedural Register Allocation. I must admit that I was really > overwhelmed with LLVM's codebase while trying to figure this out :) > There is so much to know! I think I have reached a point where I > have some sort of

On Monday 13 July 2009 11:40, Chris Lattner wrote: > > I was attempting to reduce the number of files affected, but if you > > want this change I'll go ahead and do it. > > Makes sense, thanks. Please do it as a separate patch from the other > changes though since it will be large and mechanical. Ok, no problem. > > - Tag instructons with source line information