similar to: [LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 800 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)"

2014 Jun 02
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)
The inverted dependency of Core to ReaderWriter via Simple.h was already present. My idea was to fix the problem before it gets bigger. My proposal would be to move Simple.h and Alias.h to Core. Similar to UndefinedAtom.h etc. It would be even nicer to make the naming consistent as well, since there already is UndefinedAtom.h SharedLibaryAtom.h etc Maybe: SimpleAtom.h AliasAtom.h Moving the file
2014 Jun 02
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > I agree to move these files to Core. Any objections? None here. - Michael Spencer > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Bas van den Berg > <b.van.den.berg.nl at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The inverted dependency of Core to ReaderWriter via Simple.h was already >> present. >> My
2014 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)
I've run a new scan of LLD's architecture and it appears to be getting cleaner! There are still some upward dependencies however: - core depends on Reader and Writer - passes depend on Reader and Writer - ReaderWriter/PECOFF/ReaderCOFF.cpp depends on Driver.h The updated architecture can be seen here: http://www.c2lang.org/docs/lld_architecture_20140710.png On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:07
2014 Apr 17
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture
Hi, I'm analysing the LLD code structure (aka architecture) and am trying to mold it into a component model. Currently I see 4 components: - Driver - ReaderWriter - Passes - Core I wonder if this is the order that they're supposed to be in, since there are also code dependencies upwards from: Core -> ReaderWriter Passes -> ReaderWriter ReaderWriter -> Driver For a
2014 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)
Well, it does have a Registry& that's defined in Reader.h. But that can be forward declared (and apparently is in some of the other headers it includes. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Andreas Wendleder < andreas.wendleder at googlemail.com> wrote: > Hi > > - passes depend on Reader and Writer >> > > That's an easy one. Compile tested on Windows with
2014 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] LLD's software architecture (update)
Yes, but if you look in LayoutPasses.c, it calls registry.referenceKindToString(..), so it does need the definition.. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Jean-Daniel Dupas <mailing at xenonium.com> wrote: > Using forward-declaration would not fix the layer violation. > > Le 10 juil. 2014 à 13:10, Bas van den Berg <b.van.den.berg.nl at gmail.com> > a écrit : > > Well,
2015 Jan 20
5
[LLVMdev] Can we establish layering for the LLD libraries? Current state is a bit of a mess...
I wanted to go through and map out the layering of LLD's libraries today and found that it's essentially impossible. I think some serious cleanup is needed here. Let's start with the purely link-level dependencies encoded in the CMake build: Curently the Core library depends on the ReaderWriter/Native library, which links against the ReaderWriter library, which links against the Core
2015 Jan 21
2
[LLVMdev] Can we establish layering for the LLD libraries? Current state is a bit of a mess...
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> > wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> On Jan 19, 2015, at 6:33 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> >>>
2015 Jan 21
2
[LLVMdev] Can we establish layering for the LLD libraries? Current state is a bit of a mess...
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > On Jan 19, 2015, at 6:33 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> > wrote: > > > I wanted to go through and map out the layering of LLD's libraries today > and found that it's essentially impossible. I think some serious cleanup is > needed here. > > > >
2013 Oct 07
3
[LLVMdev] [lld][Windows] Warning during builds
C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\VC\include\concrt.h(313): warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc (C:\lld-x86_64_win7\lld-x86_64-win7\llvm.src\tools\lld\lib\ReaderWriter\ELF\Hexagon\HexagonLinkingContext.cpp) [C:\lld-x86_64_win7\lld-x86_64-win7\llvm.obj\tools\lld\lib\ReaderWriter\ELF\Hexagon\lldHexagonELFTarget.vcxproj]
2013 Oct 07
0
[LLVMdev] [lld][Windows] Warning during builds
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Shankar Easwaran <shankare at codeaurora.org>wrote: > C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio > 11.0\VC\include\concrt.h(313): warning C4530: C++ exception handler used, > but unwind semantics are not enabled. Specify /EHsc > (C:\lld-x86_64_win7\lld-x86_**64-win7\llvm.src\tools\lld\** >
2015 Aug 21
2
a lld linker script bug
Hi, I've found a crash in lld when using linker script with wildcard matching. An example linker script: INPUT(os/main.o os/foo.o os/startup.o) OUTPUT(k.bin) SECTIONS { . = 0x0 .text : { *startup.o (.text) } .text.2 : { *(.tex*) } } I've wrote up a patch to fix this crash. Index: tools/lld/lib/ReaderWriter/LinkerScript.cpp <+>UTF-8
2013 Jan 10
2
[LLVMdev] [lld] Linker script findings.
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > We need to be careful about what we mean by "frontend" and "backend" > of lld. Yeah, that terminology was really vague. I identify "frontend" with the driver (GNU ld, link.exe, ld64, etc) and "backend" with ReaderWriter (i.e. roughly the object file formats). > The
2015 Aug 22
2
a lld linker script bug
Hi, Thanks for your patch, Huang. It looks good to me. Just one comment: can you write a testcase, similar to the others used for linker script testing, with your example? Alternatively, you can modify lld/test/elf/linkerscript/sections-with-wildcards.test to test your case. This will make your patch complete and ready for commit, and will ensure we do not regress on this bug if this code is ever
2017 Dec 01
2
[Release-testers] 5.0.1-rc2 has been tagged
Zig tests using Debug build of 5.0.1rc2 hit this bug: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34452 I suppose the fix has not been backported to 5.0.1. So I created a Release build of 5.0.1rc2 and all zig tests pass, with the following patches: * Patches to LLD: commit a206ef34bbbc46017e471063a4a1832c1ddafb0a Author: Andrew Kelley <superjoe30 at gmail.com> Date: Fri Dec 1 12:11:55 2017
2013 Jan 10
0
[LLVMdev] [lld] Linker script findings.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 6:49 PM, Sean Silva wrote: >> The Writer (backend?) actually gets a chance to contribute >> atoms along with the Reader atoms which are fed to the Resolver. > > Could you elaborate on this? My understanding is that ReaderWriter is > supposed to be basically a toolkit for emitting the object files > ("mechanism"), while the different drivers use
2014 Feb 04
3
[LLVMdev] [lld] Allow atoms with empty name in the RefNameBuilder::buildDuplicateNameMap()
Hi, Method RefNameBuilder::buildDuplicateNameMap() has an assert which blocks atoms with empty name. In general it looks reasonable but some toolchains (for example Sourcery CodeBench in both MIPS and ARM editions) can generate an object file contains absolute STT_FILE symbols with empty name. Moreover crt1.o object file from this toolchain has such symbol. I do not know is it a feature or bug
2016 Feb 16
2
Who patches the fixups?
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2/16/2016 7:04 AM, Jun Koi via llvm-dev wrote: > >> >> I am trying to undertand which code in LLVM patches the fixups generated >> by assembler. >> >> > What do you mean exactly? The actual machine code is generated by > MCCodeEmitter, for
2009 Jun 11
1
GRASS raster data processing
Hi, I just imported two raster maps into R using the SPGRASS6 package, one containing elevation data and the other containing an erosion index: Kar_inc <-readRAST6("Incis_Kar", plugin=FALSE) Kar_dem <- readRAST6("DEM_Kar", plugin=FALSE) I just wanted to make a xy plot of erosion parameter vs elevation. How does this work? I don't get how to handle
2016 Oct 26
2
RFC: APIs for bitcode files containing multiple modules
Hi all, As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode files to contain multiple modules. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786 I took a step towards that by proposing a change to the module format so that the block info block is stored at the top level. The next step is to think about what the