similar to: [LLVMdev] Odd code layout requirements for MCJIT

Hi All, Our team at Hip-Hop Virtual Machine (http://hhvm.com<http://hhvm.com/>) have been experimenting with using LLVM as a code generator for x86-64. We have been successfully running it for quite some time as a secondary back end. We had to modify our version of LLVM and our mods were based on 3.5 release. At this point we feel our requirements have become stable enough to start

Hi All I have 2 models working well in rails 1.2.6 : class TypeService < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :Services end class Service < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :TypeService end I was able to get the name of the service with Rails 1.2.3: s = Service.find(1) name_type_service = s.TypeService.name <<-- Now with rails 2.0.2 that doesn''t work With rails 2.0.2 s

All, I'm needing volunteers to help moderate the sessions of the LLVM Developers' Meeting. All you need to do is introduce the speaker, make sure the speaker stays on time, and run Q&A at the end (run a microphone, select people, etc). Its a pretty easy job, but critical for our meeting to run smoothly. If you are interested in moderating, please send me your top 2 session choices.

Fixes build error with btrw instruction. xen-unstable/xen/include/asm/grant_table.h:57: Error: Incorrect register `%edx'' used with `w'' suffix Signed-off-by: Lin Ming <mlin@ss.pku.edu.cn> --- xen/include/asm-x86/grant_table.h | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/grant_table.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/grant_table.h

On 9/3/15, 3:34 PM, "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com<mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: Hi, On Sep 3, 2015, at 1:38 PM, Maksim Panchenko via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: Hi All, Our team at Hip-Hop Virtual Machine (http://hhvm.com<http://hhvm.com/>) have been experimenting with using LLVM

Yeah, that's probably how I'd do it. Might be useful if you guys want to contribute that as a command line option Kevin. -eric On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Kevin Modzelewski <kmod at dropbox.com> wrote: > We do this in Pyston using a JITEventListener that just disassembles the > output; it's "it works let's move on"-quality: >

Hi all, I would like to propose "Speculative compilation support in ORC v2 JIT API" for this year GSoC summer project. Project Description: Speculative compilation support. One of the selling points of the concurrent ORC APIs is that you can start compiling a function before you need it, in the hope that by the time that you do need it it is already compiled. However, if we just

On 9/4/15 1:12 AM, Sanjoy Das via llvm-dev wrote: > Specifically on "Location records" -- > > Is it legal for the optimizer to drop the `!locrec` metadata that you > attach to instructions? The general convention in LLVM is that > dropping metadata should not affect correctness, and if the location > record information is not best-effort or optional then metadata is

Ah. IMHO, yes we should disable it until it's correct. On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org > wrote: > I'm asking if people are ok with it. :) > We've had customer reports that can be tracked down to this issue, so this > is something we'd really like to working (at least in terms of correctness). > > I can come up

Hi Bekket, Sorry for the delayed reply. By appropriate, I mean performance of compiled native code. I was referring other JIT implementations like LuaJIT & webkit FTL JIT to see how they implement their JIT. I have gone through the design of Spider Monkey & Android runtime (ART) JIT. As, you said both region based and method based compilation unit have their own advantage &

On 9/8/15 9:35 AM, Philip Reames wrote: > On the VM state synching side of things, I'm curious about the tradeoffs > involved in the approach you've used. I'm guessing from what you said > that you're essentially pre-reserving a set of allocas for the spill > locations, somehow registering those with your runtime once, then > emitting stores down the unlikely path

On 9/8/15, 9:35 AM, "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: >On 09/04/2015 11:36 AM, Brett Simmers via llvm-dev wrote: >> On 9/4/15 1:12 AM, Sanjoy Das via llvm-dev wrote: >>> Specifically on "Location records" -- >>> >>> Is it legal for the optimizer to drop the `!locrec` metadata that you >>> attach to

I think that it's really important that we try to strike some balance here. Based on my experience, this thread, and offline conversations, two things seem clear to me: 1. Overall, Phabricator is a superior tool for managing code reviews and some related processes (although GitHub's tools certainly have some benefits, and both are getting better over time). 2. Not accepting GitHub PRs

I don't intend to weigh in on either side, but just give a perspective on a few questions asked. >From an outsiders perspective, that list isn't what I'd typically describe as the workflow, since it makes "fork" and "branch" sound like difficult operations. This sounds akin to thinking that someone would reclone the svn repo before working on a new

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 9:32 AM Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 11/7/19 10:13 AM, Jameson Nash wrote: > > I don't intend to weigh in on either side, but just give a perspective on > a few questions asked. > > From an outsiders perspective, that list isn't what I'd typically describe > as the workflow, since it makes

Dynamically Allocated "Callee Saved Registers" Lists Each Calling convention (CC) defines a static list of registers that should be preserved by a callee function. All other registers should be saved by the caller. Some CCs use additional condition: If the register is used for passing/returning arguments - the caller needs to save it - even if it is part of the Callee Saved Registers

Hi Bekket, Thank you for your reply. Earlier I came across a paper called "Dynamic Look Ahead Compilation: Hide JIT compilation latencies", it devised some methods for JIT compilation of functions before the actual call takes place by using call graph analysis, branch probabilities to generate a list of functions with high likelihood of execution in near future. In my opinion it

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 3:09 AM Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Strong -1 personally. Likewise, for many of the same reasons detailed below. ~Aaron > * What is the endgoal? To fully kill phab and move to github pullrequests? > it might be best to discuss *that* first. (did i miss an RFC?) > * Separation of attention - does everyone who