similar to: [RFC] Removing PowerPC/Darwin Support?

Hi James, I agree, we should keep a mode that prints register names (instead of just the numbers). I lean toward having a verbose mode that is compatible with the GNU assembler, which means %r1 instead of just r1. gas will also accept that syntax, so it seems more useful than the Darwin syntax on current systems. What do you think? -Hal ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Y

Hi all, I just posted two patches on phabricator to remove Darwin support from the POWER backend. I thought I had posted this on the dev mailing list some time ago, but I cannot find a reference to it now. The intention here is to cleanup the POWER backend. Darwin has not been supported on POWER for quite some time now, and we'd like to use this as an opportunity to clean up several aspects

Hi all, I'm trying to understand which ABIs are supported in the PowerPC backend and I'm getting a bit confused. Here's what I've gathered so far alongside with some questions. - In PPCSubtarget.h there's DarwinABI, SVR4ABI and ELFv2ABI. - The CodeGenerator documentation claims that the AIX PowerPC ABI is followed (with some deviations). Is this refering to the DarwinABI? -

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ulrich Weigand" <Ulrich.Weigand at de.ibm.com> > To: "David Wiberg" <dwiberg at gmail.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 2:29:22 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [PowerPC] ABI questions > > Hi David, > > > I'm trying to understand which ABIs are supported in the

Hi all, I'm currently implementing a linux/ppc target in llvm. The abis between Darwin/ppc and linux/ppc are different and I'm running into problems with vararg calls. Before a variadic method is called, an extra instruction must be executed (which is creqv 6, 6, 6). This instruction is not necessary in Darwin/ppc. I looked into the PowerPC target implementation and the code generation

>> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also >> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: >> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363 >> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46 bootstrap.) >> This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me >> some hope that g++-4.0.1 is

I found only old version Darwine for PPC and want to try to compile it myself.

Hi, I am following the instructions on Writing an LLVM Pass on Darwin(8.7.0) powerpc. The loadable library is built. But "opt -load " gives error saying "Symbol not found". I am using LLVM 1.8. Could someone tell me how to fix it? I have tried the same procedure on Pentium4 Redhat9. Everything is ok there. So I think there must be some specific problem on Darwin that I should

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:17:32PM -0500, David Fang wrote: >>> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also >>> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: >>> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363 >>> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46 bootstrap.) >>> This consistency between

All, The following patch fixes the build breakage on FreeBSD/powerpc: Index: lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCJITInfo.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCJITInfo.cpp (revision 51432) +++ lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCJITInfo.cpp (working copy) @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ extern "C" void PPC64CompilationCallback(); #if (defined(__POWERPC__) ||

I am getting assembler errors on clang-llvm-2.9 output for a program with exceptions that I do not get when using the installed g++ Mac OS-X 10.4 powerpc-apple-darwin > as -version Apple Computer, Inc. version cctools-590.23.2.obj~17, GNU assembler version 1.38 the folks at gnu-binutils assure me this is an assembler bug, but also that this isn't a recognizable "gnu"

we are trying to adapt the configure in order to work with latest gcc3.3 (from apple) and g77 3.4 (from http://gravity.psu.edu/~khanna/hpc.html ) At the moment there is no need to define the __DEBUGGING__ but there is still a problem with the -lcc_dynamic does any of you know how to check for this library and explain why we see -lcc_dynamic often passed as an ld flag. Where to find doc on

Hi, over the past days I have been proofing a concept involving LLVM MC on the PowerPC target. The 32 bit part went quite ok, but i am puzzled with the results I get using the 64 bit target. When disassembling in 64bit some instructions refer to GPRs in PPC::R0 to PPC::R31, some refer to PPC::X0 to PPC::X31. I understand that the registers are modeled with Rx referring to the 32bit parts and Xx

Hello Ulrich, Thank you for a good explanation of the different variants. 2014-07-30 21:29 GMT+02:00 Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand at de.ibm.com>: > Hi David, > >> I'm trying to understand which ABIs are supported in the PowerPC >> backend and I'm getting a bit confused. Here's what I've gathered so >> far alongside with some questions. > >

> ----- Original Message ----- >> Hi all, >> My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting to >> check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my >> powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only >> provided >> __ppc__. I was wondering if this justifies using simpler macros like >> >> #define

On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > Kalle Raiskila wrote: > >> And I probably should file a bug. Is ppc32 still maintained? > > I have no concrete knowledge of this, but llvm compiles > and passes all tests on ppc32, so it seems to be maintained. > About once a week I grab the latest SVN head and check this. It is run by one of the automatic

On 30 Jul 2014, at 21:29, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > The ELFv1 ABI is used on 64-bit big-endian Linux and AIX. There's one small difference between the two: with the 64 bit ELFv1/ SVR4 ABI, tail padding for structs passed by value is only performed in case the struct is larger than 8 bytes, while for AIX 64 bit it's always done. As an aside, on Darwin/ppc64 it's done if the

On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 09:50:12 +0100 Ivan Llopard <ivanllopard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Finkel, > > Le 23/03/2012 05:50, Hal Finkel a écrit : > > The PowerPC backend on PPC64 for non-Darwin (SVR4 ABI) systems > > currently has a problem handling integer types smaller than 64 bits. > > This is because the ABI specifies that these types are > > zero-extended

Hi, I'd like to experiment with the MIPS and PowerPC backends, but, considering that they aren't widely used processors, I'd like to start with the same environment (OS/ABI/linker) used by the people who work with these backends. So, what OS/ABI/linker use the people who use these backends for production work? Thanks!!

Hi, > ----- Original Message ----- >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> Hi all, >>>> My recent commit r187027 fixed a simple oversight of forgetting >>>> to >>>> check for __ppc__ (only checking __powerpc__), which broke my >>>> powerpc-apple-darwin8 stage1 tests, since the system gcc only >>>> provided