similar to: [LLVMdev] RDPMC inst use in llvm

Yeah, that's probably how I'd do it. Might be useful if you guys want to contribute that as a command line option Kevin. -eric On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Kevin Modzelewski <kmod at dropbox.com> wrote: > We do this in Pyston using a JITEventListener that just disassembles the > output; it's "it works let's move on"-quality: >

I believe the perf tool cannot profile/analyze the JITed code in MCJIT model. Can you please confirm this ? I was working on a patch to fix this. Another question, is the there any support to map the llvm IR with x86 generated assembly ? so its easier to analyze the code generator. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Dear, I am actually using llvm ocaml binding to generate LLVM IR code. Can some one tell me how to use the binding to generate debug informations if it's possible ? Many thanks --- | J. Charles -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140621/50464cda/attachment.html>

Jon, I need to create a database of basics blocks and their execution time. The only thing I'm concerned is if a block A is more expensive than a block B. Do you think that even with the overhead I would be able to get the A > B information? Like: overhead + time(A) > overhead + time(B) => A > B. If so, I'm not too much concerned about the accuracy. Not sure if I was clear,

Fairly straightforward code motion of MSR / TSC / PMC accessors to the sub-arch level. Note that rdmsr/wrmsr_safe functions are not moved; Linux relies on the fault behavior here in the event that certain MSRs are not supported on hardware, and combining this with a VMI wrapper is overly complicated. The instructions are virtualizable with trap and emulate, not on critical code paths, and only

Fairly straightforward code motion of MSR / TSC / PMC accessors to the sub-arch level. Note that rdmsr/wrmsr_safe functions are not moved; Linux relies on the fault behavior here in the event that certain MSRs are not supported on hardware, and combining this with a VMI wrapper is overly complicated. The instructions are virtualizable with trap and emulate, not on critical code paths, and only

Hello, This series of patches integrates msr.h header. What it really does, is a series of steps to allow us to get rid of duplicate code between i386 and x86_64 versions With this done, achieving paravirt for x86_64 gets really easy, just a couple of extra code. The first patch was already sent a while ago, but was not yet pushed to any tree , to my knowledge. So it is sent again. Also,

Hello, This series of patches integrates msr.h header. What it really does, is a series of steps to allow us to get rid of duplicate code between i386 and x86_64 versions With this done, achieving paravirt for x86_64 gets really easy, just a couple of extra code. The first patch was already sent a while ago, but was not yet pushed to any tree , to my knowledge. So it is sent again. Also,

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 5:49 AM Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de> wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 03:53:09PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > Ahh, so any instruction that can have an instruction intercept set > > potentially needs to be able to tolerate a #VC? Those instruction > > intercepts are under the control of the (untrusted relative to the

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 5:49 AM Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de> wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 03:53:09PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > Ahh, so any instruction that can have an instruction intercept set > > potentially needs to be able to tolerate a #VC? Those instruction > > intercepts are under the control of the (untrusted relative to the

Dear Users, Recently I have started using HINT option in Asterisk 1.2.4 with my Polycom 500 phone. What I have notice that for a day or two everything is working great but then HINTs stop working on my Polycom phone. It also happens when I reload asterisk from console. I do sip debug and I do not see anymore asterisk sending NOTIFY messages about my watched extension. To make it work again I

Greetings, tl;dr - I'm looking for sources to an Android Icecast client written in Java. long summary: I maintain an open source Android app (WREK Online) that plays the live mp3 stream from the station's Icecast server. Using the built in MediaPlayer class that is part of the Android SDK works OK. As a developer, I just give it the streaming URL of the Icecast server, hook up a few

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:38:05PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Rebased onto current acme/perf/core: > > -- > From: Borislav Petkov <bp at suse.de> > Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:04:53 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] tools: Unify export.h > > So tools/ has been growing three, at a different stage of their > development export.h headers and so we should unite into one.

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:38:05PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Rebased onto current acme/perf/core: > > -- > From: Borislav Petkov <bp at suse.de> > Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:04:53 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] tools: Unify export.h > > So tools/ has been growing three, at a different stage of their > development export.h headers and so we should unite into one.

Hi, Has anyone had any success with running different PassManagers on llvm::Modules they've already JITed and are executing? In detail: 1) getting the IR, in form of an llvm::Module 2) calling PassManager->run() on the module 3) calling getFunction() and getPointerToFunction() to JIT the module 4) executing the JITed code using the function pointer received in step 3 and then what I

Hi, I found the following wiki page in the Unladen Swallow project: http://code.google.com/p/unladen-swallow/wiki/CodeLifecycle This would appear to answer my question. Could someone confirm for me if it's definitely unsafe to attempt to optimise/JIT any Modules while a different thread is currently executing a JITed function which has been generated from them? Or am I just missing

Hello, My name is Janek van Oirschot, currently student premaster embedded systems at the Technical University of Eindhoven and interested in participating in GSoC and contributing to LLVM. I have some experience with development for the GNU Assembler in which I looked into assembly-time relaxation. I have looked at the open projects page, found some interesting projects but still have some

I have an app that's dynamically generating and JITing code, and will have many such cases in the course of its run. They need to be JITed separately, because I need to execute the first batch before I know what the second one will be. Of course, I *still* need to execute the first after the need for the second arises, so I need to retain the JITed machine code for all the functions I

Hi Stephen, I confirm your observation. AFAIK the current JIT keeps informations from the module, for example AssertingHandle on Values. It's part of my plan to make the MCJIT independent from Module stuff to allow reoptimizations, or to have multiple copies of JITed functions for one function in the module, but there is a long road to go. Olivier. On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Stephen

I am using LLVM to compile script code and then executing using the JIT compiler via the runFunction() method. The script code is contained with a C++ program compiled with G++. I am having a problem when an intrinsic function (i.e. a function implemented in C++ which is called from the LLVM compiled script) throws a C++ exception. I want the exception to be caught by the C++ code that invoked the