similar to: [LLVMdev] finalizeObject function implemetation in MCJIT is wrong

Hi Radek, Sorry for the delayed response. I haven't had time to check your analysis yet, but you're probably right: MCJIT's support for multiple modules in a single instance is patchy at best. Do you have a test case (e.g. an lli invocation) that triggers this bug, or is this something you discovered just by reading the code? Cheers, Lang. On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:46 AM, David

Hi guys. I found a little bug in implementation of MCJIT. I noticed that when I added object file (with all needed debug information) to lli by using -extra-object flag, it's impossible to debug it with gdb. Object file is in ELF format generated by llc. It is properly loaded by mcjit. I noticed that the reason is probably in lack of calling "registerWithDebugger()" after object

Hi, Recent trunk has a lot of failures on PPC64/Linux. One seems to be crash with a backtrace like: [ 3149s] -- [ 3149s] 0 libLLVMSupport.so 0x00003fff7ed0b864 llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(_IO_FILE*) + 4294746876 [ 3149s] 1 libLLVMSupport.so 0x00003fff7ed0bb1c [ 3149s] 2 libLLVMSupport.so 0x00003fff7ed0c520 [ 3149s] 3 linux-vdso64.so.1 0x00003fff7f7b0478 __kernel_sigtramp_rt64 + 0 [ 3149s] 4

Aha. Thanks. Seems like I need to call mapSectionAddress with the target address. But how I copy the code? What function would I call? On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > Yes, that is one of the intended use models for MCJIT. > > > > If you look at the source for ‘lli’ you’ll find an option called > “remote-mcjit” which

A need has arisen to generate code using MCJIT but not in the target process instead in a different process (and possibly even different machine though not in the scope). Reading through the tutorials and MCJIT design document, it seems like this is possible or was kept in mind during design of MCJIT. How do I achieve this? Are there examples? Dave -------------- next part -------------- An

No, I was asking how to extract the code from MCJIT, and you said it use a custom memory manager. When you say that I must treat each section as a block, do you mean that there is inter-block relative offsets need to be maintained? Or that when I get a section, I must copy it to target process memory as a one-shot contiguous block. If it's second, I think we're ok. On Wed, Mar 25, 2015

Thanks, Andy. I'm now thinking about the case where the generated code has references to memory addresses in the IR (the only case I suppose is call remoteProcessADDR). I know this is not LLVM specific but what happens when that ADDR changes due to process restart or different machine. I know this is the clients responsibility to put the right address in the call instruction, but generally

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org> > To: "İsmail Dönmez" <ismail at donmez.ws> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 8:14:18 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Lots of regtest failures on PPC64/Linux > > Hi Ismail, > > Is

Agreed, the existing ownership seems sub-optimal. I wouldn't say broken, but subtle at least - looks like you get the choice to either manage the ownership of the Module object yourself, or let the context handle it (eg: currently it'd be valid to just do "{ LLVMContext C; new Module(C); new Module(C); }" - Modules end up owned by the context and cleaned up there). Might be hard

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/attachments/20111230/f132dad8/attachment-0004.ksh> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/attachments/20111230/f132dad8/attachment-0006.html>

In the most basic case, I'd imagine something like this: auto C = std::make_shared<LLVMContext>(); struct ModuleAndSharedContextDeleter { std::shared_ptr<LLVMContext> C; operator()(Module *M) { delete M; } /* ctor to init C */}; std::unique_ptr<Module, ModuleAndSharedDeleter> M(new Module(C.get()), ModuleAndSharedContextDeleter(C)); (or invert this and traffic in structs

Hi All, ORC's new concurrent compilation model generates some interesting lifetime and thread safety questions around LLVMContext: We need multiple LLVMContexts (one per module in the simplest case, but at least one per thread), and the lifetime of each context depends on the execution path of the JIT'd code. We would like to deallocate contexts once all modules associated with them have

I''m trying without any succes to create application in which I have one keyed table. The table structure is: CREATE TABLE employees ( pin INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, first_name VARCHAR(30) NOT NULL, last_name VARCHAR(30) NOT NULL ); Whenever I enter new record, I need the the filed pin is also filled by user. Whenever a user edit the table, there should be option to edit or not edit the

Hello, can anyone help me. After a few weeks I returned to the rails to play with it. But I recognize that I''m now not abble to build appdoc. The same thing that few weeks ago worked without an problem now give me an error: unrecognized option `--line-numbers --inline-source'' $ rake --trace --verbose reappdoc (in /home/radek/src/firma/giga-net/ncc/work) ** Invoke reappdoc

Hello, on my old system I''m using ipchains. Can anyone help me with converting rule /sbin/ipchains -A forward -j MASQ -s source_addr -d destination_addr 443 -p tcp to shorewall. I know that I can write eth0 source_addr to /etc/shorewall/masq file but I can''t found where I can specify the destination address. The reason for this is to allow one user (computer) access only to

Hi all, I tried to modify Kaleidoscope Tutorial (toy.cpp from llvm/examples/Kaleidoscope/Chapter7, LLVM 3.3 release branch) in order to use MCJIT instead of JIT. I get segmentation fault when running toy.cpp with fibonacci example from the tutorial. My modified toy.cpp is in attachment and still works with JIT (when #define USE_MCJIT line is commented out). I read discussions regarding

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 hello everyone! i'd like to sincerely ask you to include a fix for ssh-copy-id bug i'll be linking below. it's a trivial fix which resolves https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2206 and eases life of many. it's been field-tested by redhat devs and users so i see no problem in incorporating it.

I'm trying to build LLVM on Android rather than the other way around! Really just to see if it can be done. I worked out the first problem (my code was written for the old JIT and I'd missed something in updating to the MCJIT to make it work on ARM). It still doesn't work, but at this point I have no idea why and it'll be a while before I get to look at it again: the Android

I reformulate my needs. How I can write (layout/controller) so I can read value of Id from the new form when creating new record. With following structure: CREATE TABLE words ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, word VARCHAR(40) ); I want enter new records like: id=47812, word=''pes'' id=1382, word=''krough'' id=67145, word=''brum'' --

Dear LLVM-Mailing-List, I'm using the llvm::EngineBuilder to create an instance of the llvm::ExecutionEngine, I then JIT my code, take the addresses I need and delete the llvm::ExecutionEngine. But now I started to wonder, if I could reuse that instance for a new module again? I first tried calling llvm::EngineBuilder without setting a Module, I planned to add it later - but when I do this