similar to: Errorifying the bitcode reader

Hi all, As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode files to contain multiple modules. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786 I took a step towards that by proposing a change to the module format so that the block info block is stored at the top level. The next step is to think about what the

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Will Dietz <willdtz at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for > ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode > files to contain multiple

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 4, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi,

> On Oct 28, 2016, at 2:16 PM, Will Dietz <willdtz at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk <mailto:peter at pcc.me.uk>> wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Will Dietz <willdtz at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Will Dietz <willdtz at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com>

> On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled "RFC: a more detailed design for ThinLTO + vcall CFI" I would like to introduce the ability for bitcode files to contain multiple modules. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D24786> I took a step

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi, > > As part of PR27551 I want to add a string table to the bitcode format to > allow global value and comdat names to be shared with the proposed symbol > table (and, as side effects, allow comdat

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Oct 25, 2016, at 6:28 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> As mentioned in my recent RFC entitled

> On Oct 28, 2016, at 6:00 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > This is about https://reviews.llvm.org/D26100 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D26100> > > That change moves the block info block state from BitstreamReader to BitstreamCursor in order to accommodate multiple block info blocks (the idea is that the cursor would store the

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi, > > As part of PR27551 I want to add a string table to the bitcode format to > allow global value and comdat names to be shared with the proposed symbol > table (and, as side effects, allow comdat

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:26 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM,

Hi all, This is about https://reviews.llvm.org/D26100 That change moves the block info block state from BitstreamReader to BitstreamCursor in order to accommodate multiple block info blocks (the idea is that the cursor would store the block info block state for whichever block info block is active for that cursor). Duncan objected to it on the grounds that we should aim for a design that would

Thanks Joe! I’d like to propose that Peter Collingbourne takes over, he’s been doing most of the recent work there. — Mehdi > On Nov 28, 2016, at 6:43 AM, Joe Abbey <jabbey at arxan.com> wrote: > > I'd very much like to re-engage with LLVM, but that will have to wait for another time. Feel free to re-assign bitcode code ownership. > > Sincerely, > > Joe >

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 9, 2016, at 4:42 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:26 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter

Hi, As part of PR27551 I want to add a string table to the bitcode format to allow global value and comdat names to be shared with the proposed symbol table (and, as side effects, allow comdat names to be shared with value names, make bitcode files more compressible and make bitcode easier to parse). The format of the string table would be a top-level block containing a blob containing

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:45 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:26 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Peter

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:33 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:10 PM, David

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> Is this change indeed intended as a visible API change to source code generating references to argument list values? If so, can you point me to a description of how I should change our code? Should I bug someone else about this problem? Should this API change be documented in

> On 2014 Dec 5, at 10:53, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 09:35:22AM -0800, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >> >>> On 2014-Dec-05, at 00:39, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 06:44:36PM -0800, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >>>> As of