similar to: Assertion fail/crash in X86FrameLowering::GetFrameIndexReference SEH

I think r262546 introduced the assumption that allocas are used exactly once with catchpad. It seems easy to fix, though. On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:51 PM, Carlo Kok via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > This turned out to be related to reusing the local used in the catchpad, > for example given the following c++ code: > > extern void rthrow(); > > int

Indeed, it's 32bits x86 and there's no .safeseh or anything like it, even readobj -coff-load-config says nothing: File: ConsoleApplication830.exe Format: COFF-i386 Arch: i386 AddressSize: 32bit Now I know what to look for, thanks! On Mon, Aug 20, 2018, at 18:46, Reid Kleckner wrote: > This is 32-bit x86, right? Sounds like the exception handler did not > appear in the /safeseh

It's not a solution to the actual bug (which is, as the thread you linked discusses, a problem with the assumption on LLVM's part that the __chkstk function lies within 2GB of the emitted code's address space) but there is a simple workaround: hoist all allocas to the first basic block of your function. This allows the JIT to perform all stack allocations in a single adjustment of the

Hi, I'm using LLVM to convert expressions to native assembly, the problem is when LLVM compiles this code: define void @fn_0000000000000000(i8*, i8*, i8*) { bb: %res = alloca i32 %3 = load i32* %res %4 = bitcast i8* %0 to i32* %5 = load i32* %4 %6 = bitcast i8* %0 to i32* %7 = load i32* %6 %8 = xor i32 %5, %7 store volatile i32 %8, i32* %res %9 = load i32* %res %10 = icmp

Hi. I'm very new to LLVM. For reasons to do with custom exception handling, we have a need to check IP/PC at runtime against code ranges. This can encompass multiple logically adjacent blocks. How to do this? I'm guessing:   insert a label at end of every block, takes it address, store that somewhere in our data; preferably as an offset from module or function start, but full address

This got me into thinking. Indeed the problem is related to Windows exceptions, so I am not sure whether the bug reported<https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24374> is actually fixed. Compiling Pony code (helloworld) that includes no exceptions does work fine (with optimizations). As soon as exceptions on windows come into play, writing the object file dies with the mentioned error in

… Also, it doesn’t appear that you are running on windows… From: David Majnemer Date: Saturday 12 September 2015 18:31 To: Sebastian Blessing Cc: Reid Kleckner, "llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>" Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Optimizer issues on Windows $ ~/llvm/Debug+Asserts/bin/llc try.ll $ echo $? 0 On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 6:39 AM, Sebastian Blessing

ola, ive been looking at adding support for an -msave-args option for use on x86_64. the short explanation of it is that it makes x86_64 function prologues store their register arguments on the stack. the purpose of this is to make the arguments trivially accessible for things like stack traces with arguments. as per https://blogs.oracle.com/sherrym/entry/obtaining_function_arguments_on_amd64,

Maybe we should also change the stack probing code. I think ___chkstk_ms is used since gcc 4.6. It simplifies the prologue generation code a bit. Regards, Kai On 10.12.2013 02:18, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > Mingw switched abis with the release of gcc 4.7 > (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.7/changes.html). The main change is that now > mingw (like msvc) given thiscall calling convention to

Op 16-3-2018 om 20:16 schreef Evgeny Leviant: > Hello Carlo, > > I tried your reproducer and faced different problem from one you described > (I'm using MacOS Sierra and lld built from trunk on Mar, 15). The crash happens > when SelectionDAGBuilder::lowerInvokable tries to access EH info of this function: > >

Hi, I have a case that is causing me grief in the form of an assert. The prolog Epilog inserter tries to remove Frame Index references. I have a DBG_VALUE instruction that looks like this (alongwith the Frame Index). This is for the Hexagon backend. ************************** fi#2: size=4, align=4, at location [SP-84] DBG_VALUE <fi#2>, 0, !"fooBar"; line no:299

I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a dbg_value machine instruction. Currently the XCore target replaces the frame index with the frame register and sets the next operand to the byte offset from the frame

Hi, We 've been working on an LLVM backend for High Performance Erlang (HiPE) [1], the native code compiler of Erlang/OTP [2]. ErLLVM [3] targets the X86 and AMD64 architectures for now but there is some ongoing work from a team on the Uppsala University to also support ARM. In our implementation, we have paid special attention on retaining ABI-compatibility with the Erlang Runtime System in

Hi all, I am trying to implement statepoints for the AArch64 target and I’m running into the issue where the following bitcode: define i32 addrspace(1)* @test(i32 addrspace(1)* %ptr) gc "statepoint-example" { entry: call token (i64, i32, i1 ()*, i32, i32, ...) @llvm.experimental.gc.statepoint.p0f_i1f(i64 0, i32 0, i1 ()* @foo, i32 0, i32 0, i32 0, i32 0, i32 addrspace(1)* %ptr) ret

I’ve been experimenting with SEH handling in LLVM, and it seems like the unwind funclets generated by LLVM are much larger than those generated by Microsoft’s CL compiler. I used the following code as a test: void test() { MyClass x; externalFunction(); } Compiling with CL, the unwind funclet that destroys ‘x’ is just two lines of asm: lea rcx, QWORD PTR x$[rdx] jmp ??1MyClass@@QEAA at XZ

Hi, Following Chris' advice, I will rebase the patches and break them in 3 distinct emails (one at a time) in order to be easier for a reviewer to approve/comments. Please note that the three patches while being code-wise independent, they 're strongly-connected *semantically*, meaning that including just a subset of these patches to LLVM's code base is quite weak if the others are

Hi list, I am trying to implement the technique outlined in the following paper: http://www.cs.umd.edu/~mwh/papers/martin10ownership.html in LLVM. My approach so far involves the use of an IR level transform (via runOnFunction) to identify memory loads and stores. One thing I need to do (I am pretty sure I need to do it at least) is automatically mark each stack frame as "owned" by the

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com>wrote: > 2013/3/20 Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com>: > > Anton, > > > > [+Eric, Nick, > > the e-mail thread context has been broken a few times, so you should > > probably look at the llvmdev archives. > > It all starts here: > >

Mingw switched abis with the release of gcc 4.7 (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.7/changes.html). The main change is that now mingw (like msvc) given thiscall calling convention to methods by default. I think the last bug blocking us to support the new abi has just been fixed. The question now is how to switch. The attached patches simply switch llvm and clang to the new ABI. This is similar to what

On 10/10/11 19:19, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:26 AM, Richard Osborne wrote: >> I'm investigating a bug associated with debug information that manifests >> itself in the XCore backend (PR11105). I'd like to understand what the >> expected behavior of eliminateFrameIndex() is when it is called on a >> dbg_value machine instruction. >