Displaying 20 results from an estimated 400 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Inconsistent third field in global_ctors (was Re: [llvm] r214321 - UseListOrder: Visit global values)"
2014 Jul 31
2
[LLVMdev] Inconsistent third field in global_ctors (was Re: [llvm] r214321 - UseListOrder: Visit global values)
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Rafael Espíndola <
rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Looking a little deeper, it's not "old-style" exactly; rejecting this
> > isn't trivial.
> >
> > - According to LangRef, the third field is optional [1].
> >
> > [1]:
> http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#the-llvm-global-ctors-global-variable
2014 Jul 31
2
[LLVMdev] Inconsistent third field in global_ctors (was Re: [llvm] r214321 - UseListOrder: Visit global values)
> On 2014-Jul-30, at 18:05, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-Jul-30, at 17:19, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Looking a little deeper, it's not "old-style" exactly; rejecting this
2014 Jul 31
2
[LLVMdev] Inconsistent third field in global_ctors (was Re: [llvm] r214321 - UseListOrder: Visit global values)
> On 2014-Jul-31, at 10:07, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote:
>> Hold on, I'm still not sure what kind of guarantees (restrictions) the C
>> API imposes.
>>
>> If I implement (2), then -verify will fail if someone (e.g.) adds
>>
2014 Apr 30
4
[LLVMdev] Best way to clean up empty global_ctors
Hi,
I'd like to fix PR19590, which is about llvm.global_ctors containing
functions that end up being empty after optimization (which causes the
linker to add useless init_array entries to the output binary).
globalopt removes empty functions from llvm.global_ctors, but by the
time the function becomes empty globalopt has already run and it
doesn't run again.
I'm wondering what the
2017 Jun 19
2
JIT, LTO and @llvm.global_ctors: Looking for advise
Hi Everyone,
We are looking for advise regarding the proper use of LTO in
conjunction with just-in time generated code. Our usage scenario goes
as follows.
1. Our front-end generates an LLVM module.
2. A small runtime support library is linked-in. The runtime
library is distributed as bitcode. It is generated using "clang++
-emit-llvm' and 'llvm-link'. This allows
2013 Aug 26
2
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Adding an optional association field to llvm.global_ctors
To implement http://llvm.org/PR16959<http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16959>,
I need to add a new field to global_ctors.
Static data members of class template instantiations can have initializers
that must only run once on program startup. Itanium solves this with guard
variables and the emission of multiple initializers, only one of which
actually initializes the data at runtime.
2013 Sep 02
0
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Adding an optional association field to llvm.global_ctors
Hi Reid,
On 26/08/13 23:43, Reid Kleckner wrote:
> To implement http://llvm.org/PR16959
> <http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16959>, I need to add a new field to
> global_ctors.
>
> Static data members of class template instantiations can have initializers that
> must only run once on program startup. Itanium solves this with guard variables
> and the emission of
2017 Jun 20
2
JIT, LTO and @llvm.global_ctors: Looking for advise
Thanks for the hindsight.
I am currently working on a patch/potential fix which introduces a new
Linker::ImportIntrinsicGlobalVariables flag. The patch includes a unit
test reproducing the problem. Hopefully, that will help getting more
feedback.
Note that it might take a while before I am allowed to upload the patch
since I need approval from Autodesk Legal department.
Cheers,
Benoit
Benoit
2013 Sep 03
2
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Adding an optional association field to llvm.global_ctors
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> Hi Reid,
>
> On 26/08/13 23:43, Reid Kleckner wrote:
>
>> To implement http://llvm.org/PR16959
>> <http://llvm.org/bugs/show_**bug.cgi?id=16959<http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16959>>,
>> I need to add a new field to
>>
>> global_ctors.
>>
>>
2017 Jun 20
2
JIT, LTO and @llvm.global_ctors: Looking for advise
Thanks Peter, this is very useful feedback.
I did manage to change the behavior of LinkOnlyNeeded to correctly import
all variables with AppendingLinkage. In fact, I discovered that there was
already something fishy. A variable with AppendingLinkage would get
imported correctly from the source module if the destination module
already contained a definition for that variable and wouldn't be
2014 May 01
3
[LLVMdev] Best way to clean up empty global_ctors
I talked about this with Nick in person months ago, and my understanding is
that GlobalOpt is also an enabling optimization that needs to run early.
For example, if we can eliminate an initializer to an internal global with
no other stores to it, we can propagate the result.
Maybe we should run it twice.
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Rafael Espíndola <
rafael.espindola at gmail.com>
2013 Sep 04
0
[LLVMdev] Proposal: Adding an optional association field to llvm.global_ctors
Hi Reid,
On 03/09/13 20:08, Reid Kleckner wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr
> <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> wrote:
>
> Hi Reid,
>
> On 26/08/13 23:43, Reid Kleckner wrote:
>
> To implement http://llvm.org/PR16959
> <http://llvm.org/bugs/show___bug.cgi?id=16959
>
2010 Apr 11
1
[LLVMdev] llvm.global_ctors and other "appending linkage" global variables?
Can anyone explain how llc translates "appending linkage" global
variables like llvm.global_ctors into assembly? In the case I am
examining, the global_ctor variables are in multiple bitcode object
modules produced by the llvm compiler as arrays of pointers. As
documented, the arrays seem to be combined when the different bitcode
object modules are linked into one, so now there is one
2014 Aug 05
2
[LLVMdev] LLVM as a shared library
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 5, 2014, at 2:51 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2014, at 1:46 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (7) Make the C API truly great.
2014 May 01
2
[LLVMdev] Best way to clean up empty global_ctors
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Rafael Espíndola
<rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 May 2014 14:08, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>> I talked about this with Nick in person months ago, and my understanding is
>> that GlobalOpt is also an enabling optimization that needs to run early.
>> For example, if we can eliminate an initializer to an
2009 Nov 06
2
[LLVMdev] llvm.global_ctors
When you link two modules each of which contains a global_ctors array,
is there a guarantee as to what order they'll run in?
2019 Jan 02
2
llvm-link: why link '@llvm.global_ctors' into dest file even it's not used in dest file?
Hi all,
Recently I do some jobs based on llvm-link tool.
I wonder why link '@llvm.global_ctors' into dest file, even it's not used
in dest file?
And how can I remove it?
Thank you all in advance!
Fangqing
Xilinx Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
2009 Nov 06
0
[LLVMdev] llvm.global_ctors
Hello, Kenneth
> When you link two modules each of which contains a global_ctors array,
> is there a guarantee as to what order they'll run in?
No, the order to static ctors is undefined. There is special
"priority" attribute though. I don't remember whether we honor it or
not...
--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint
2010 Aug 29
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM-C: getting the @llvm.global_ctors
Hello,
I am still experimenting with the C interface to LLVM, it is going well so far. But I am seeming to have trouble getting access the @llvm.global_ctors variable and add a function that I have created.
Any idea how to approach his by only using the LLVM-C interface?
Thank you,
Filip
2012 Sep 10
3
[LLVMdev] Question about ctors, dtors and sections on Windows
Hello all!
I extended the LDC2 with a pragma to register a funcion in the
llvm.global_ctors or llvm.global_dtors list.
On Linux, references to these functions are placed in .ctors and .dtors
sections and everything runs fine.
On Windows, functions from llvm.global_ctors are placed in section
.CRT$XCU, which is automatically called by the MS C Runtime. However,
functions from