similar to: LibC++ failure on ARM

On 28 July 2016 at 09:42, David Chisnall <david.chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > I think it’s important to differentiate between ‘needs’ as in ‘requires a precisely matched version’ and ‘needs’ as in ‘requires something to provide this functionality’. Clang needs something equivalent to libc++ and something equivalent to libunwind, but it doesn’t (or, at least, shouldn’t) need a

On Sat, 3 Jun 2017 16:04:57 -0700 Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > I think you should be able to fix it by changing the > compiler-rt/lib/xray/test/CMakeLists.txt. If you find the > "add_compiler_rt_test" call and move "-lstdc++" to the end, just after > "-lrt" it should work. Thanks, Tim. I don't see "-lrt":

Hi, I am trying to use LLVM/clang to build a binary for ARM Cortex M platforms. When I build my binary the linker fails to find these libraries. ./bin/clang++ -target arm-none-eabi -mcpu=cortex-m4 ./temp.cpp -L ./lib/ -L ./libexec/ -L ../build3_v7m/lib/ ld.lld: error: unable to find library -lunwind ld.lld: error: unable to find library -lc ld.lld: error: unable to find library -lm ld.lld: error:

Folks, I'm running the libc++ tests in tree [1] and I'm seeing two class of errors: 1. -lrt is used, but there is no such "librt.a" in the path. Results are that some symbols are not found, or that the DSO object wasn't. Adding a symlink in build/lib/librt.a to build/clang/3.8.0/lib/linux/libclang_rt.builtins-aarch64.a worked. 2. "collate_byname failed to construct

Hi Peter, On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 18:37, Peter Smith via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello Arslan, > > > I am guessing I can borrow libraries such as lc and lm from GCC > > arm-none-eabi*, but for clang_rt.builtins-arm.a (which I thought > > should've been built with LLVM build but I couldn't find that library > > in my build

On 28 July 2015 at 12:10, Schlottke-Lakemper, Michael <m.schlottke-lakemper at aia.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > I am wondering about the meaning of the cmake flags LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXX and LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXXABI. Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler for building LLVM is clang, and if this clang has support for libc++ with libc++Abi, that both lib++ and libc++abi should be used

Hi Renato I had the impression that Michael actually wanted the latter, like GCC > has autoconf options to change the default behaviour of the compiler > at build time. > > I may be wrong, though. yes I thought that was what he wanted because he said Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler for building LLVM is > clang > That combined with the standard cmake

> On Aug 24, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > Interesting. > This is a relatively new addition (fsanitize-coverage=pc-tables, which is now a part of -fsanitize=fuzzer). > The tests worked (did they? On Mac?) so I thought everything is ok. For tests we never compile the tested target with -O3 (and that wouldn’t be sufficient), and for

I think the simplest fix is something like this: diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp b/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp index c6f0d17f8fe..e81957ab80a 100644 --- a/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp +++ b/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp @@ -256,6 +256,7 @@ SanitizerCoverageModule::CreateSecStartEnd(Module

On 6 Jun 2017, at 21:41, Dmitry Golovin <dima at golovin.in> wrote: > > Neither is the case. The system that I want to build with this toolchain is Linux-based, but not GNUish. I would like to use musl instead of glibc and libc++ instead of libstdc++, only use binutils provided by LLVM. I think that in that case I will link libc++abi and libunwind to libc++ statically, so I will not

On 1/30/15 1:17 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool wrote: > Although this has been discussed in the past, I think that given a few > conversations, it seems that it unfortunately needs to be brought up again. > > There seems to be some disagreement over the ideal location of the > unwinder (libunwind). Currently, libunwind resides in a subdirectory of > libc++abi. There seems to be some

Hi Dean, For me the build is still broken: -- Builtin supported architectures: i386;x86_64;x86_64h CMake Error at projects/compiler-rt/lib/xray/tests/CMakeLists.txt:21 (add_library): add_library cannot create target "RTXRay.test.osx" because another target with the same name already exists. The existing target is a static library created in source directory

Hi Dean, I have fixed the build failure in r329832. In general, do you think it would be possible to perform the task using higher-level functions available from AddCompilerRT.cmake? They were written exactly to avoid such errors. Regards, George > On Apr 11, 2018, at 10:50 AM, George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com> wrote: > > Hi Dean, > > For me the build is still

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> > wrote: > >> I think the simplest fix is something like this: >> >> diff --git a/lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/SanitizerCoverage.cpp >>

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev < >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:20

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: > Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> writes: > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > >> wrote:

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 4:07 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 30 January 2015 at 20:43, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> > wrote: > > Last time we brought this up, there was only partial consensus, and then > > someone arbitrarily declared total consensus (without compelling > arguments > > in any particular direction)

Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> writes: > Justin, > Calling appendToUsed has horrible complexity and if we call it in > every function clang consumes tons of memory (6Gb when compiling one > of the clang's source files). This killed my machine today :) > > The solution is to call appendToUsed once per module, instead of once > per function. Oh right,

On 28 Jul 2016, at 15:30, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > > My problem, and I'll be quick not to digress too much, is that > --rtlib=compiler-rt is slightly broken. I can't assume libunwind or > libc++abi are there, so for rtlib=RT, I don't add -lunwind and > -lc++abi "as needed" like we do for libgcc's counterparts. > >

Hi, I am wondering about the meaning of the cmake flags LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXX and LLVM_ENABLE_LIBCXXABI. Are they used to indicate that if the C/C++ compiler for building LLVM is clang, and if this clang has support for libc++ with libc++Abi, that both lib++ and libc++abi should be used (instead of linking to the default, which at least on Linux is libstdc++)? If not, what is the canonical way of