similar to: [LLVMdev] Upstreaming x32 ABI support

Hi, There's several, to my eyes, somewhat related looking bugs: Bug 36743 - Cannot select: X86ISD::CALL ICE with -mx32 -O2 -fno-plt https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36743 Bug 34268 - JITting of x32 code on x64 fails with crash or instruction selection error. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34268 There's unfortunately been no investigation. I'm asking because I hit

Hi Pavel, We (the Native Client team) are also interested in helping you get these reviewed and in, especially the x86 backend stuff. Native Client's x86-64 ABI is similar to x32 so we could probably share a good portion of the code if it's structured the right way. -Derek On 1404316081542, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Pavel

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:29 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk>wrote: > > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:50 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk > > >wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at

Hi, I'm working on bringing up complete coverage for a Gentoo x32 "desktop" system. I've been cooking up quite a few patches for various packages to push upstream, but right now, the biggest blocker is the lack of support for building with/codegen targeting x32 in llvm/clang. Since the x32 patches were sent last year, I see support code has landed in LLVM, and basic handling of

Clang patch for X32 support. Applies against current trunk. --- ./tools/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td.orig 2013-05-16 21:51:51.286129820 +0000 +++ ./tools/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td 2013-05-16 21:53:24.875004239 +0000 @@ -841,6 +841,7 @@ HelpText<"Enable hexagon-qdsp6 backward compatibility">; def m3dnowa : Flag<["-"], "m3dnowa">,

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk>wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:50 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk > >wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:27 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > > > Hi Steven, > > > > > >

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:50 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk>wrote: > > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:27 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > > Hi Steven, > > > > > > This looks interesting and raises a number of questions :) > > > > > > 1) Does applying this patch

Ah, I've replied in a different thread already. What Dmitri says - If you're interesting in only building the Clang on x32 host, you may avoid checking out compiler-rt repo for now. On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk> > wrote: > > I've

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 15:22 +0100, Steven Newbury wrote: > This patch is still not creating elf32_x86_64 objects. No idea > why. :( It does however, fix elf_x86_64 (-m64) code generation on x32 > hosts which is nice. :) I know why. I had assumed Michael Liao (the original patch author) had submitted all the _LLVM_ x32 support as separate patches, and it was just the

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk> wrote: > If I'm going to submit the Clang patch, how should it be submitted? One > patch with what's required to get x32 host to work, then another > enabling x32 code generation once the required changes to llvm are > merged? Would that be sufficient? Sounds good to me. Dmitri --

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:29 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > Ah, I've replied in a different thread already. What Dmitri says - If > you're interesting in only building the Clang on x32 host, you may avoid > checking out compiler-rt repo for now. > > compiler-rt does make a convenient compiler test though.. :) fatal error: error in backend: Cannot select: 0x30ccf38: ch =

Hello, Background: We (the Portable Native Client team) would like to continue upstreaming our LLVM modifications which contain support for Software Fault Isolation (SFI) as required for sandboxing programs to run under Native Client. Since the "total patch size" is quite big, we are splitting the effort to manageable chunks that can be committed, tested and reviewed separately as

This patch is still not creating elf32_x86_64 objects. No idea why. :( It does however, fix elf_x86_64 (-m64) code generation on x32 hosts which is nice. :) --- ./tools/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td.orig 2013-05-16 21:51:51.286129820 +0000 +++ ./tools/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td 2013-05-16 21:53:24.875004239 +0000 @@ -841,6 +841,7 @@ HelpText<"Enable hexagon-qdsp6

All, We have our first CL ready and waiting, but haven't heard from the community. Are there issues or suggestions we should understand a priori? Cheers, David On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:59 PM, David Sehr <sehr at google.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Background: > We (the Portable Native Client team) would like to continue upstreaming > our LLVM modifications which

X32 support patch for compiler-rt. Applies against current trunk. --- projects/compiler-rt/make/platform/clang_linux.mk~ 2013-08-21 06:27:38.000000000 +0000 +++ projects/compiler-rt/make/platform/clang_linux.mk 2013-08-21 11:16:55.891621025 +0000 @@ -41,7 +41,18 @@ SupportedArches += x86_64 endif else - SupportedArches := x86_64 + # x86-64 arch has two ABIs 64 bit x86-64 and 32 bit

If you are interesting to play around X32, you may refer to http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/x32 to bootstrap a local environment on Linux. Yours - Michael -----Original Message----- From: cfe-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:cfe-commits-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Liao, Michael Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 5:09 PM To: llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu; cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu

Hi Eric, It's the unsolved problems on the pass-MCTargetOptions-everywhere path that are my main concern with that approach rather than the amount of work. The first problem is that the result of IRObjectFile::CollectAsmUndefinedRefs() depends on the ABI but IRObjectFile doesn't know it. How would you deliver the ABI to IRObjectFile? The second problem is that IRLinker will link

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk>wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:27 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > Hi Steven, > > > > This looks interesting and raises a number of questions :) > > > > 1) Does applying this patch actually bring working sanitizers to x32 > > platform? > > That is, after you build the

Hi Steven, This looks interesting and raises a number of questions :) 1) Does applying this patch actually bring working sanitizers to x32 platform? That is, after you build the clang, does "clang -fsanitize=whatever foo.c" compile/link/run with expected results? I doubt that, as there is some platform-specific code in all the sanitizers, and many of them heavily depend on the address

Rafa?l Carr? wrote: > That would need a special case for Linux x32 which is x86_64 with 32 > bits pointers It won't be wrong for x32, just sub-optimal. Please feel free to suggest a way to detect x32. Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/