similar to: Improve JIT C API

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 4000 matches similar to: "Improve JIT C API"

2015 Sep 08
3
Improve JIT C API
Lang, aren't you going to be the major (only?) player when it comes to Orc APIs, if you're not opposed to it having them in the C bindings proper will certainly help. That's my vote, I understand it is different from the previous cases but the API surface area here is relatively small. On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jauhien, >
2015 Sep 08
2
Improve JIT C API
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jauhien, > > A few people have requested a C API for ORC. I don't think ORC's ready for > a stable C API, but I'm not opposed to providing C bindings that will > probably be reasonably stable in practice (though with no guarantees). I've > actually already knocked up some trivial
2015 Sep 20
3
LLVM static libs
Hi, the first question is addressed both to llvm-dev and gentoo-dev. The second one is Gentoo specific. Is there any possibility to build LLVM both as static and shared libraries? What I see currently is that our ebuild makes LLVM to build shared libs unconditionally. Is there a possibility (if it is impossible to build both lib types) to at least give to user control on what kind of libs he
2018 Nov 05
2
ORC JIT api, object files and stackmaps
I have a few questions about the new ORC JIT. I saw Lang Hames (hi!) excellent talk at the llvm-dev meeting a few weeks ago. The ORC JIT is undergoing some API changes and I'd like/need to take advantage of them. (1) How do I take ownership of the ObjectFile once the ORC JIT has created it? I'd like to take ownership of object files generated by the ORC JIT so that I can save them to
2016 May 12
2
Orc/MCJIT: Relocations vs pointers to functions
Thanks! Currently using MCJIT. But migration to ORC is on my TODO list. - Paweł On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 8:30 PM Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Pawel, > > Option (1) and (3) are very similar, but using custom resolution (option > 3) guarantees that JIT'd code can't accidentally end up depending on > functions in your JIT that you didn't mean to
2017 Aug 24
1
Invalid Signature of orc::RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer::NotifyLoadedFtor
Hi all, hi Lang It's a little late to report issues for release_50, but I just found that thing while porting my JitFromScratch examples to 5.0. This is a really nifty detail, but (if I'm not mistaken) the function signature of RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer::NotifyLoadedFtor is incorrect: $ grep -h -r -A 1 "using NotifyLoadedFtor"
2019 Sep 19
3
"corrupted size vs. prev_size" when calling ExecutionSession::lookup()
Hi, I wrote a compiler that generate IR code and run it on the JIT, and there randomly crashed due to "corrupted size vs. prev_size" depends on the IR code generated from the source code. Here's how I created the JIT: llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); llvm::InitializeNativeTargetAsmPrinter(); llvm::InitializeNativeTargetAsmParser(); // create jit llvm::orc::ExecutionSession
2018 Nov 05
2
ORC JIT api, object files and stackmaps
Hi Christian Your use case seems to have similar requirements as remote JITing in ORC. So far I haven't used that part myself and I am sure Lang can tell you much more about it. However, this comment on the RemoteObjectClientLayer class sounds promising for your questions (1) and (2): /// Sending relocatable objects to the server (rather than fully relocated /// bits) allows JIT'd code
2017 Aug 06
2
Compile issues with LLVM ORC JIT
I tree to compile the LLVM ORC JIT examples. But I'm stuck in some problems I can't solve my own. First at all I compile with C++14 enabled with latest stable LLVM and clang, this means 4.0.1. I get the following error. Do I missed some specific compile option? Compilation looks like this here. |CompilingcontribJIT.cpp PWD:/home/ikuehl/projects-llvm/TurboLisp/domainEngineer
2017 Apr 09
2
Possible stack corruption during call to JITSymbol::getAddress()
Firstly, apologies if this is not the right place to be asking this question--feel free to point me in the correct direction. I could be doing something wrong here but stackoverflow didn't feel like the correct place for this since there's so little there about LLVM ORC. Basically, I have a reproduction case (below) where if I throw an exception before I call JITSymbol::getAddress()
2016 May 17
3
External function resolution: MCJIT vs ORC JIT
When using ORC JIT, I'm having trouble with external function resolution (that is, of a function defined in the app, with C linkage). I add a declaration for the function to my IR, and when I use MCJIT, it finds it and all is well, But when I use ORC JIT (I *think* correctly, at least it closely matches what I see in the tutorial), I get an LLVM error, "Program used external function
2015 Jul 17
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Developer Policy for LLVM C API
Can we also codify when something should be added to the C API? For a lot of folks the C API is the only usable interface. I am one of them. We are not as vocally represented because don't generally give back to the community, usually because we are just consumers of this library. (Or maybe I'm totally wrong and lots of us give back). For example, ORC APIs in C the bindings. On Fri, Jul
2020 Jan 18
3
ORC JIT Weekly #1
Hi, Lang As a starter using LLVM JIT to improve OLAP execution engine performance, I'm very glad to hear that. I can't find some useful document help me get start to use the new ORC JIT API quickly. Only can find some examples how to use it, but don't know the internal from low level, and very blurred to design a clearly JIT toolset. Hope more tutorials add in and help ORC JIT more
2017 Apr 24
1
[FFI] [OrcJIT] Status update on C FFI for OrcJIT?
I looked around for the status of OrcJIT FFI support. The last e-mail thread I could find was this one: Link <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-February/081679.html> Raw: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-February/081679.html Is OrcJIT now considered stable enough that there can be "official" exposed C APIs? If not, what's the standard approach if I
2019 Sep 23
4
"Freeing" functions generated with SimpleORC for JIT use-case
Hi all, I am using LLVM for JIT use-case and compile functions on the fly. I want to "free" the modules after some time and reclaim any memory associated with it. I am using the SimpleORC API <https://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/BuildingAJIT1.html> now. Is there an API to "free" all the memory associated with the module? I use one "compiler" instance (think similar
2017 Apr 17
2
Possible stack corruption during call to JITSymbol::getAddress()
Hi David, This looks like bad eh-frame data due to a failure to fix up the frame descriptor entries: <debug: adding frame> EHFrameAddr: 0x7feae5827000, EHFrameLoadAddr: 0x00000000e5827000, EHFrameSize: 60 ==64588==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x7feae5827020 (pc 0x7feae886d970 bp 0x000000000001 sp 0x7ffca10e75f8 T0) Eyeballing the code in RuntimeDyldELF (vs
2017 Apr 20
2
Possible stack corruption during call to JITSymbol::getAddress()
Hi David, Thanks very much for that. I'll continue to dig in as time permits, and I'll update the bug report with my progress once it's filed. Cheers, Lang. On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:42 PM, David Lurton <dlurton at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Lang. I think I'll go the bug creation route. I have an email out > to llvm-admin requesting an account on bugs.llvm.org.
2017 Sep 22
2
Question regarding GlobalMappingLayer in LLVM 5
Hi, I'm attempting to port some code which uses the GlobalMappingLayer in the Orc JIT. This code worked fine in LLVM 4, but I'm getting a compile error with LLVM 5. I think the problem is that this layer hasn't been modified to account for some of the changes made in LLVM 5, but I wanted to make sure that I wasn't missing something. I have code which looks like this:
2017 May 01
1
Possible stack corruption during call to JITSymbol::getAddress()
Hi David, Sorry to hear. Has anyone followed up with you yet? I've continued to dig in to this in my spare time and I've found the issue. It's a use-after-free, rather than any sort of memory smashing. ORC is currently failing to deregister the EH-frame section when the JIT is torn down (but *is* deallocating the memory for it). Normally that's not disastrous (though it does
2016 May 19
2
External function resolution: MCJIT vs ORC JIT
Thanks so much! This seems to do the trick. I would have spun my wheels for a long time before discovering all of this, wow. Do I even want to know what additional chickens need to be sacrificed to get this to work on Windows? -- lg > On May 18, 2016, at 1:52 PM, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Larry, > > You're basically there, but you're hitting