similar to: [LLVMdev] Linking/archiving bitcodes with module asm

Hi, The code @ line 584 of TargetRegistry.h effectively suppresses specifying any AsmStreamer constructor function but stock createAsmStreamer one. Is it by intention or condition should be replaced with != ? Best regards, Max

On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Max Kazakov <max.kazakov at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > The code @ line 584 of TargetRegistry.h effectively suppresses specifying any > AsmStreamer constructor function but stock createAsmStreamer one. Is it by > intention or condition should be replaced with != ? Hi Max, are you sure that you have the tip-of-tree version of

Hi, Andrey, sorry for the delay: I made a page with the code available for download: http://homepages.dcc.ufmg.br/~douglas/projects/RangeAnalysis/RangeAnalysis.html Feel free to get it, and if you need some help, I will be happy to tell you how to set the analysis up, in case the explanation in the page is not good. I also have a report describing the implementation here: (

Can't read your paper because the permission is not set. Chuck On 2/25/2011 12:16 PM, Douglas do Couto Teixeira wrote: > Hi, Andrey, > > sorry for the delay: I made a page with the code available for > download: > http://homepages.dcc.ufmg.br/~douglas/projects/RangeAnalysis/RangeAnalysis.html >

Hi Douglas, On 21.02.2011 20:27, Douglas do Couto Teixeira wrote: > My work is not part of the LLVM mainline yet. But I would be happy to > contribute with the code of my range analysis implementation if it can help > you in something else. We were thinking of adding VRP to LLVM too, though we were mostly interested in Patterson's approach (i.e. not connected with SSI form). It

Hi llvm-dev, I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but I posted a question on Stack Overflow <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51585688/building-llvm-with-bazel> a week ago with no response, so feel free to point me elsewhere if there is a more appropriate place. Basically, I have a project using LLVM as a dependency currently building with CMake, which I would like to

Hi Manman, On 21.06.2013 1:51, Manman Ren wrote: > > The intent of this proposal is to speedup compilation of "-flto -g" for c++ programs. > This is based on discussions with Adrian, David and Eric. I see that the uniquing patches are already in trunk. Are there more to come or the feature is essentially completed? It would be great to have some announcement on the LLVMdev

Hi all, As of r232885 I've removed the argument-less TargetMachine::getSubtarget and TargetMachine::getSubtargetImpl. For the targets that aren't completely independent of this I've gone ahead and left a non-virtual version of the function in the target specific TargetMachine. What this means in practice is that those targets can only use a bare getSubtarget call in their target

It is common for targets to have specific assembly directives they need to support. For example, ppc has ".tc" and ARM has its own set of directives for describing EH tables. On the parser side we already had a target parser interface, but on the streamer side they all had to go into the basic MCStreamer. We also had just one MCAsmStreamer which had to implement them all. In r192181 I

Hi all, I am trying to compile with a minimal TestAsmParser class, but I get the following error. ---------------- [43/780] Linking CXX executable bin/llvm-mc FAILED: : && /usr/bin/c++ -fPIC -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -Wall -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wno-missing-field-initializers -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-maybe-uninitialized -Wno-comment -std=c++11

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: > Jack, > > What version of CMake are you using? > > -Chris Chris, I am using cmake 3.5.2. My read of this problem is as follows. While libLLVM.dylib is being linked against -lxar when -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL=ON is passed to cmake, the libLLVM.dylib is created with -Wl,-dead_strip such that

Hi, I try to create a backend to support AsmParser, but it hasn't the red part as below. I find the Mips has this. Do you know how to make it appear? Jonathan #ifdef GET_ASSEMBLER_HEADER #undef GET_ASSEMBLER_HEADER // This should be included into the middle of the declaration of // your subclasses implementation of MCTargetAsmParser. unsigned ComputeAvailableFeatures(uint64_t

Hi everyone. We're interested in contributing a Hexagon assembler to MC and we're looking for comments on a good way to integrate the grammar in to the infrastructure. We rely on having a robust assembler because we have a large base of developers that write in assembly due to low power requirements for mobile devices. We put in some C-like concepts to make the syntax easier and this

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: >> Jack, >> >> What version of CMake are you using? >> >> -Chris > > Chris, > I am using cmake 3.5.2. My read of this problem is as follows. > While libLLVM.dylib is

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: >> As a simplification, the compiler deals almost exclusively in pseudo >> instructions. By x86 analogy, using pseudos to unfold a TEST32rm into >> MOV32rm + TEST32rr means I can skip the complex operand fitting effort >> needed to pick specific machine instructions. There are many

Jonathan <gamma_chen at yahoo.com.tw> wrote: > I try to create a backend to support AsmParser, but it hasn't the red part > as below. I find the Mips has this. Do you know how to make it appear? > > Jonathan > > #ifdef GET_ASSEMBLER_HEADER > #undef GET_ASSEMBLER_HEADER > // This should be included into the middle of the declaration of > // your subclasses

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Jack Howarth > <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: >>> Jack, >>> >>> What version of CMake are you using? >>> >>>

Thanks you. I'm new to LLVM backend, so the help is much appreciated. On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Matt Arsenault <arsenm2 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 23, 2015, at 3:36 AM, 李弘宇 via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > wrote: > > > The first line has the following error message: > > > > sop1-playground.s:1:15: error: invalid immediate:

Resending, any pointers are much appreciated. On 5/7/2012 11:16 PM, Ashok Nalkund wrote: > > > On 5/7/2012 10:17 PM, Bendersky, Eli wrote: > <snip> >>>> $lli -entry-function="ISimEngine_GetVersion" -use-mcjit libengine.bc >>>> LLVM ERROR: Inline asm not supported by this streamer because we don't >>>> have an asm parser for this

Hi Ivan, Sorry for the confusion - in the latest version it is line 760: static void RegisterAsmStreamer(Target &T, Target::AsmStreamerCtorTy Fn) { if (T.AsmStreamerCtorFn == createAsmStreamer) T.AsmStreamerCtorFn = Fn; } Best regards, Max