similar to: Is the CppBackend still supported?

Yes, it's quite obviously dead and should be deleted. When I brought this up last time -- after realizing that it wasn't actually a backend that targetted c++ (which might be useful), but rather just something that emitted IR by calling llvm C++ functions (which really isn't IMO) -- someone also pointed out that it also really ought to be using IRBuilder...if anyone cared about it.

> after realizing that it wasn't actually a backend that targetted c++ > (which might be useful) Exact same thing just happened to me.. it's not obvious, especially when reading the llc info: $ llc -version Registered Targets: arm - ARM arm64 - ARM64 (little endian) cpp - C++ backend x86 - 32-bit X86: Pentium-Pro and above x86-64

There was, a long time ago, a backend that actually targetted C. It was deleted in 2012 at r153307. On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 8:37 AM, Stefan Gränitz <stefan.graenitz at gmail.com> wrote: > after realizing that it wasn't actually a backend that targetted c++ > (which might be useful) > > Exact same thing just happened to me.. it's not obvious, especially when > reading

Hi, I am wondering why we dont support PPC32 LE? Here is the output of llvm-mc --version, in which only PPC32, PPC64 & PPC64LE are supported. $ llvm-mc --version LLVM (http://llvm.org/): LLVM version 3.6.2 Optimized build with assertions. Built Aug 2 2015 (11:39:46). Default target: x86_64-apple-darwin15.4.0 Host CPU: core-avx2 Registered Targets: aarch64 - AArch64

Hello, I'm trying to create a pure LLVM toolchain (that will not depend on GNU and produce GNU-free code too) on a musl based distribution. For now, I use gcc to bootstrap and build all LLVM components. I do it individually because I was running out of space and memory trying to build all using LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS. Also, I don't want to create a all-in-one package. Then, once

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Stanislav Manilov < stanislav.manilov at gmail.com> wrote: > As in "look at the source of clang" or as in "look at the -S -emit-llvm" > output? If you mean the former, then would that be easy for someone who > hasn't seen the clang source before? > Generally the latter - then potentially set some breakpoints & look at

The usual advice I provide people is "see what Clang does with an equivalent C construct" On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Stanislav Manilov < stanislav.manilov at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > There is another benefit to keeping the CppBackend: it's great for > learning how to use the IR and the C++ API in particular, as can be seen > from this SO Q&A: >

+1 On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:10 AM, Filipe Cabecinhas via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Ronan KERYELL via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >>>>>> On Tue, 3 May 2016 16:36:01 -0400, Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> said: > > > >

>>>>> On Tue, 3 May 2016 16:36:01 -0400, Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> said: Rafael> Care to send a patch deleting it? :-) On the other hand these requests come back from time to time on the mailing list and it is still used in many attics of various projects as a de-facto internal representation to interface with other tools for

This patch adds EmitTypeAuxAttribute() function to CGDebugInfo, which allows other parts of clang issue auxiliary information through an enumeration type in Dwarf information. For example, by calling DI->EmitTypeAuxAttribute(type, "ID", 1234); We can get following information in dwarf: <1><3f>: Abbrev Number: 3 (DW_TAG_structure_type) <40> DW_AT_name

Hi all, Actually,I found there is a same problem for arm.For this case,I think > maybe we can play a trick in the clang. > Checking whether the given arch valid or not,before we throw it to the > parser,which can be used for both arm > and aarch64. For the actions I mentioned above,I wrote a check function as below, basing on the naming rules of the arm architecture. +//Only if

Hello, would it be possible to update config.sub and config.guess to the latest versions (or at least version from automake-1.13.1) in order to support new architectures based on the ARM 64 bit CPU? Patch: http://plautrba.fedorapeople.org/openssh/openssh-latest-config.sub-config.guess.patch Related Fedora bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=926284 Thanks, Petr

Is there example code of how to construct the CPPTargetMachine and run addPassesToEmitFile method with Kaleidoscope example? Any help is appreciated. Thanks. Richard Catlin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130401/cd082202/attachment.html>

> * Has there ever been an attempt to implement a real C++ Backend? Without > having done research in that direction - shouldn't that be quite > straightforward? Anyone aware of technical difficulties? The first question probably is what it would be useful for? -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University

On 23 May 2016 at 15:01, James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > There was, a long time ago, a backend that actually targetted C. It was > deleted in 2012 at r153307. It was largely unmaintained, and its tests were failing all the time when we targeted other architectures. I think it'd be cool to have a back-end targeting C/C++, but it'd have to be

Hi all, Thanks for Aleksandar Beserminji great job: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50437 It is not easy to reproduce the LLVMBUG-38221[1] by building OpenJDK8, it needs some workaround https://raw.githubusercontent.com/xiangzhai/jdk8u-dev/master/Workaround-compile-with-llvm.patch LLVM toolchain[2] is just able to compile OpenJDK8 for mips64el now: http://hg.loongnix.org/ 1.

Hi HotSpot and LLVM developers, I am building OpenJDK8[1] with LLVM toolchain[2] for mips64el, it failed to build: /home/loongson/jdk8-mips/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp:52:35: error: ordered comparison between pointer and zero ('address' (aka 'unsigned char *') and 'int') if (Universe::narrow_oop_base() > 0) { // Implies UseCompressedOops.

Hi all, I met this error(title) when i was trying to compile llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7 on loongson2f,a mips compatible platform.I also failed to build a cross-compiler and the error message was the same . Is that means llvm-gcc cannot support mips back-end now? Thanks. Here is my configure options: $export TARGET=mips64el-unknown-linux-gnu $../../src/llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7.source/configure

Hi Thomas, Thanks for your kind response! Please review my backport for hs25, thanks a lot! diff -r 3544d85cfe11 src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp --- a/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp Thu Jul 19 10:00:36 2018 +0100 +++ b/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp Fri Jul 20 10:06:37 2018 +0800 @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ // Check whether val is not-null-decoded compressed oop, // i.e. will grab into the base of the heap

Hi Thomas, Looks good. Your changes in loopPredicate.cpp does not match original changes - they miss iff->is_RangeCheck() check [1]. But in JDK8 we did not have specialized RangeCheckNode class in C2. Suggested fix should be fine fro jdk 8u. Reviewed. Please, when sending RFA ( approval request) use original 8174050 bug id. Thanks, Vladimir [1]