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

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

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

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

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

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

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]