similar to: Whole program LLVM bitcode files

Hi all, I'm trying to generate whole program bitcode files for linux kernel and do interprocedural analysis on kernel. I use llvmlinux to compile kernel with clang and generate a bunch of bitcode files successfully. I need to link all these bitcode files together into a single bitcode file, so that I can run whole program analysis. Should I use libLTO to link all these bitcode files

Hello, With clang/llvm 9.0 adding support for ASM GOTOs, it is now possible to compile the latest Linux kernel with clang without any modification. However, is it possible to generate a single bitcode for the whole Linux kernel? Earlier approaches would involve hacks, like compiling separate bitcode files and then linking with llvm-link, or using wllvm, or using some other wrapper. Frequently,

Hi, Professor Adve suggested that we post this question to llvm-dev. Thanks in advance for your advice. My colleagues and I want to create whole-program bitcode for large real programs like Apache, BIND, OpenLDAP, etc. We want the whole-program bitcode to include every part of the program for which we have source code. For example, in the case of Apache's "httpd" server, we want

Dear John, Thanks for your reply. I want to do whole program analysis, all what I need are just the separate .bc files. What instructions should I follow? I run the configure on apache in this way: CC=clang CFLAGS=-emit-llvm ./configure while I get the error message like: checking for gcc... clang checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C compiler cannot

On 9/29/11 11:45 AM, Eric Christopher wrote: >> (I'm jumping into the middle of this conversation as it looks like you're discussing something that might be relevant to my work. Sorry I'm not up to speed on the full context of the discussion...) >> >> If you are asking whether anyone is using machinery in LLVM's build system to compile programs into LLVM bitcode

Wink zhang wrote: > Dear John, > > Thanks for your reply. I want to do whole program analysis, all what I > need are just the separate .bc files. What instructions should I follow? > I'm a little confused. Whole-program analysis requires that you link all of the individual bitcode files from different compilation unit (i.e., individual .c files) together into a single

Thanks John. Your approach worked fine for my small toy program. Now, I would like to run my module pass on a huge project (still a single executable) consisting of a few thousand bit code files scattered in many different directories. And some of them are static libraries. Do you still think it's a good idea to manually gather and link them with llvm-ld? I've seen other module pass

On 8/19/11 4:36 PM, Jinwook Shin (HOTWING) wrote: > > Thanks John. Your approach worked fine for my small toy program. Now, > I would like to run my module pass on a huge project (still a single > executable) consisting of a few thousand bit code files scattered in > many different directories. And some of them are static libraries. Do > you still think it's a good idea

Hi, Is there a tutorial on how to get started with writing link-time optimization passes? The documentation at http://www.llvm.org/docs/LinkTimeOptimization.html explains the design of the LTO interface, but does not explain where to start writing code. Would my pass go inside libLTO.a or is it separate from libLTO.a? What I would like to be able to do is traverse through the entire

Dear All, I'm trying to create whole bitcode files for applications on Mac OS X (i.e., compiling everything to LLVM bitcode and then linking it together into one large bitcode file). I'm currently doing this by modifying Makefiles to compile programs with llvm-gcc/g++ and then linking with llvm-ld. Is there a simpler way to do this? I've heard that the native linker on Mac OS

Hi Terence, I believe that this is in fact similar to an approach Coverity uses (or used at one time) as a robust solution to determine what was done during a build. I can imagine that one can build a robust system following this technique, but it also seems like it might be quite a bit of work. Another possible alternative not mentioned is to teach the compiler driver (clang, most likely) to

On Sep 29, 2011, at 10:35 AM, John Criswell wrote: > On 9/29/11 11:45 AM, Eric Christopher wrote: >>> (I'm jumping into the middle of this conversation as it looks like you're discussing something that might be relevant to my work. Sorry I'm not up to speed on the full context of the discussion...) >>> >>> If you are asking whether anyone is using

Hi, Kelly, Have you found the solution for this problem? I met a similar problem when I were trying to test MySQL 5.0 with LLVM. The following is my step, but still failed since llvm-ld can not recognize some gcc link flags. 1. during the configuration, use a script such as llvm-gcc.sh, at this time the script only invoke the gcc. This is necessary because the gnu configure will test the

Hi,all I have written a wrapper which includes gcc/g++,ld and llvm counterparts, it invokes native or llvm compiler and linker according to the options it receives,after I replace the native tools with my wrapper in libtool script, I just typed like this make CC=wrapper AC_CFLAGS=-emit-llvm then I got a bc file of slapd and other tools in clients directory The accessory is the whole-program

>I have written a wrapper which includes gcc/g++,ld and llvm counterparts, >it invokes native or llvm compiler and linker according to the options it >receives,after I replace the native tools with my wrapper in libtool >script, I just typed like this > >make CC=wrapper AC_CFLAGS=-emit-llvm > >then I got a bc file of slapd and other tools in clients directory > >The

On 9/22/11 4:04 PM, Jinwook Shin wrote: > Thanks John. I appreciate your help. De nada. > > I have taken the libLTO approach and it worked like a charm :) For > those who wanted to achieve the same thing, below are the steps I've > taken. > > John -- a small question: I thought I wouldn't need to touch > Makefiles at all, but that wasn't the case. Could

Thanks John. I appreciate your help. I have taken the libLTO approach and it worked like a charm :) For those who wanted to achieve the same thing, below are the steps I've taken. John -- a small question: I thought I wouldn't need to touch Makefiles at all, but that wasn't the case. Could you take a look at Step 4) and tell me what you think? Thanks! 1) Create your own libLTO and

Hi, I found some posts on the topic of whole program bitcode and gold plugin. I put lto_codegen_write_merged_modules(cg, "/path/to/output.bc") into gold-plugin.cpp all_symbols_read_hook() and compiled one autotooled program (ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/diction/diction-1.11.tar.gz) as described in the gold plugin document, however, I still did not see the output.bc. Can anyone has

> You can use Clang to compile source to bitcode: > > clang -c hello.c -emit-llvm -o hello.bc > Yes. My problem is to automatically create .bc files with ./configure && make. Ideally, when compiling a project like "grep", I'd like to obtain a single .bc file containing all the project's functions, instead of the grep binary executable. I already tried

Hi, It would be nice if it were easier for relative novices to build whole-program bitcodes for large, complex applications with hairy build systems. Several readers of this list have been trying various approaches for a few months but as far as I know we haven't yet found a good general solution. Approaches that have been tried include 1) placing wrappers for the usual tools (gcc, ar, as,