Displaying 20 results from an estimated 600 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] Patchpoints used for inline caches and pointless reloads"
2014 Oct 31
2
[LLVMdev] Stackmaps: caller-save-registers passed as deopt args
This is a follow up on a conversation some of us had at the hacker lab -- I
noticed that sometimes I will get notified that a deopt value lives in a
register that is not callee-save (caller-save I guess, but is there another
term for this that is less similar to callee-save?). This surprised me
quite a bit since those registers immediately got clobbered by the call
inside the patchpoint, so we
2014 Nov 05
2
[LLVMdev] Stackmaps: caller-save-registers passed as deopt args
> On Oct 31, 2014, at 5:28 PM, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> Thank you for starting this discussion!
Yes, sorry for being unresponsive for a few days. Sanjoy summarized the issues perfectly.
> I think the distinction is really between whether the live values are
> "live on call" or "live on return".
2013 Oct 23
0
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal
I'll respond to a few questions below. I'll start a new thread for GC discussion.
On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote:
>> Now with regard to patching. I think llvm.patchpoint is generally useful for any type of patching I can imagine. It does look like a call site in IR, and it’s nice to be able to leverage calling conventions to inform
2019 Jan 15
7
[RFC] Introducing an explicit calling convention
Hi All,
TLDR: Allow calling conventions to be defined on-the-fly for functions
in LLVM-IR, comments are requested on the mechanism and syntax.
Summary
=======
This is a proposal for adding a mechanism by which LLVM can be used to
generate code fragments adhering to an arbitrary calling
convention. Intended use cases are: generating code intended to be
called from the shadow of a stackmap or
2015 Jun 17
3
[LLVMdev] design question on inlining through statepoints and patchpoints
I've been looking at inlining invokes / calls done through statepoints
and I want to have a design discussion before I sink too much time
into something I'll have to throw away. I'm not actively working on
adding inlining support to patchpoints, but I suspect these issues are
applicable towards teaching LLVM to inline through patchpoints as
well.
There are two distinct problems to
2013 Oct 24
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal
On 10/22/13 10:48 PM, Andrew Trick wrote:
> I'll respond to a few questions below. I'll start a new thread for GC
> discussion.
Good idea. Thanks.
>
> On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com
> <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote:
>
>>> Now with regard to patching. I think llvm.patchpoint is generally
2013 Oct 23
5
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal
Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the
list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support came from, I
wanted to draw this conversation to the attention of someone more
familiar with the LLVM implementation than myself.
On 10/22/13 4:18 PM, Andrew Trick wrote:
> On Oct 22, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com
> <mailto:fpizlo
2015 Jun 17
2
[LLVMdev] design question on inlining through statepoints and patchpoints
The long term plan is a) evolving, and b) dependent on the specific use
case. :)
It would definitely be nice if we could support both early and late
safepoint insertion. I see no reason that LLVM as a project should pick
one or the other since the infrastructure required is largely
overlapping. (Obviously, I'm going to be mostly working on the parts
that I need, but others are always
2014 May 01
6
[LLVMdev] Proposal: add intrinsics for safe division
Andy - If you're not already following this closely, please start.
We've gotten into fairly fundamental questions of what a patchpoint does.
Filip,
I think you've hit the nail on the head. What I'm thinking of as being
patchpoints are not what you think they are. Part of that is that I've
got a local change which adds a very similar construction (called
2014 May 02
3
[LLVMdev] Proposal: add intrinsics for safe division
On May 2, 2014 at 11:53:25 AM, Eric Christopher (echristo at gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Philip Reames
<listmail at philipreames.com> wrote:
> Andy - If you're not already following this closely, please start. We've
> gotten into fairly fundamental questions of what a patchpoint does.
>
> Filip,
>
> I think you've hit the nail on
2014 May 01
2
[LLVMdev] Proposal: add intrinsics for safe division
On 04/29/2014 12:39 PM, Filip Pizlo wrote:
> On April 29, 2014 at 11:27:06 AM, Philip Reames
> (listmail at philipreames.com <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>) wrote:
>> On 04/29/2014 10:44 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote:
>>> LD;DR: Your desire to use trapping on x86 only further convinces me
>>> that Michael's proposed intrinsics are the best way to go.
2014 May 02
5
[LLVMdev] Proposal: add intrinsics for safe division
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Philip Reames
<listmail at philipreames.com> wrote:
> Andy - If you're not already following this closely, please start. We've
> gotten into fairly fundamental questions of what a patchpoint does.
>
> Filip,
>
> I think you've hit the nail on the head. What I'm thinking of as being
> patchpoints are not what you think
2013 Oct 23
2
[LLVMdev] GC StackMaps (was Stackmap and Patchpoint Intrinsic Proposal)
Hi all,
I don't know if I understand everything, but it seems really
interesting for a runtime developer, stackmap and patchpoint looks
perfect for a lot of optimizations :) I just have few question to
verify if I understand what are these stackmaps and patchpoints, and I
discuss the GC after.
* I have a first very simple scenario (useful in vmkit). Let's imagine
that we want to lazily
2014 Feb 26
5
[LLVMdev] Representing a safepoint as an instruction in the x86 backend?
I've got a pseudo instruction with some tricky semantics I need help
figuring out how to encode properly. For those interested, this is to
support fully relocating garbage collection. I'm going to try to
express the requirements clearly so that you don't need to understand
the use case in detail.
My end goal is to capture a list of registers and/or stack offsets for a
list of
2016 Feb 13
2
Code in headers
> On Feb 11, 2016, at 12:43 AM, via llvm-dev <Alexander G. Riccio> wrote:
>
> I don’t think that we can agree to abstract code guidelines without knowing what it means in practice for the codebase. If you’re interested in this, please include a diff that shows the impact to the headers, and we should also measure what happens to the performance of the generated compiler.
>
>
2014 May 02
1
[LLVMdev] Proposal: add intrinsics for safe division
On 05/02/2014 11:57 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2014 at 11:53:25 AM, Eric Christopher (echristo at gmail.com
> <mailto:echristo at gmail.com>) wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Philip Reames
>> <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote:
>> > Andy - If you're not already following this closely, please start.
>> We've
2006 Mar 15
2
Table with a field name ''type'' problem.
I have a table with a fieldname called ''type'' which does not present
itself on the CRUD screens. However if I rename it to ''some_type'' it
works just fine. Any ideas? Here is my configuration:
Ruby version 1.8.2 (i386-mswin32)
RubyGems version 0.8.10
Rails version 1.0.0
Active Record version 1.13.2
Action Pack version 1.11.2
Action Web Service version 1.0.0
2013 Dec 18
2
[LLVMdev] Trying to use patchpoint in MCJIT
Ok I see. Of course, at runtime, it's enough for dynamic linking or for
deoptimization. However, wmkit acts both as a jit and as an aot. For the
aot, it means that I can not use patchpoint and that I should have two
different compilation strategy. It's not so difficult, but in this case, I
can not use patchpoints to generate gc's stackmap for the aot (basically, I
think that I could
2004 Dec 29
0
Access denied based on Netbios Alias
Every week or so, Samba stops answering to a server's FQ host name via Netbios. However, it will continue to answer on an alias declared at "netbios aliases" in smb.conf.
"net view \\name01" will result in "Access Denied", and "net view \\name0" is successful.
To be clear, both aliases point to the same machine. Restarting the smbd service fixes the
2016 Feb 09
2
Adding support for self-modifying branches to LLVM?
Hi,
I'm coming back to this old thread with data about the performance of NOPs.
Recalling that I was considering transforming NOP instructions into
branches and back, in order to dynamically enable code. One use case for
this was enabling/disabling individual sanitizer checks (ASan, UBSan) on
demand.
I wrote a pass which takes an ASan-instrumented program, and replaces each
ASan check with