similar to: Building the CRT

On 03/20/2017 03:33 PM, Jonathan Roelofs wrote: > On 3/20/17 1:47 PM, Evandro Menezes via llvm-dev wrote: >> Folks, >> >> I'm at a loss trying to add Compiler-RT to an LLVM build, even after >> checking out the instructions at http://compiler-rt.llvm.org, so I'd >> appreciate your help. >> >> I've tried adding the CMake options

Hi, Sam. I think that it's a fair comparison. Keep in mind that the GP is only used to reach global variables of local scope and the GOT, where the address of global variables of global scope reside. This model assumes that the distance between the GP and the global data area, GOT and local scope variables is defined at link time. __ Evandro Menezes ◊ SiFive ◊ Austin, TX > On Mar

I'd appreciate some help in figuring out how to determine which InstrItinClass an instruction belongs to. For example, an InstrItinClass is defined in Schedule.td as: def FOO : InstrItinClass; Which is then used to build an InstrItinData in ProcessorItineraries and to specify the class of a particular instruction. I'd like to find out from a given instruction which class it belongs

Oh, I wasn’t really thinking about devices without an MMU where the addresses are physically separated. Makes sense. This reminds me of rwpi on ARM; it has a sort of similar scheme of referring to data indirectly through a pointer, but it also changes the ABI to keep the pointer in a reserved register. -Eli From: Evandro Menezes <evandro.menezes at sifive.com> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2020

> On Jul 21, 2020, at 14:30, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > >> On Jul 21, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Jonathan Roelofs via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> A question of preference came up in https://reviews.llvm.org/D83588 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D83588>

Hi, Jonathan. > On Jul 21, 2020, at 17:15, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan_roelofs at apple.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jul 21, 2020, at 1:46 PM, Evandro Menezes <evandro.menezes at sifive.com <mailto:evandro.menezes at sifive.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jul 21, 2020, at 14:30, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org

> On Jul 22, 2020, at 18:09, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan_roelofs at apple.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jul 22, 2020, at 4:31 PM, Evandro Menezes <evandro.menezes at sifive.com <mailto:evandro.menezes at sifive.com>> wrote: >>> Sure, let’s talk about what that end goal should be! Can you give some other examples of where these inconsistencies could be

If I’m following correctly, there are two size-limited areas. One area, limited to 2GB, is the “text” area. This contains all the code. Then there’s a “global” area, limited to 4GB, which is pointed to by the global pointer. This contains the GOT, plus a flexible area that the object file can stick small bits of data into. And then outside of both of those, additional data is unlimited. It

Hello, I believe MCInstrDesc::getSchedClass() is what you're looking for. -Jim On Nov 28, 2011, at 5:03 PM, Evandro Menezes wrote: > I'd appreciate some help in figuring out how to determine which > InstrItinClass an instruction belongs to. > > For example, an InstrItinClass is defined in Schedule.td as: > > def FOO : InstrItinClass; > > Which is then used

For background on these calls, see <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135087.html>. Reminder: the purpose is to co-ordinate between active contributors. If you have support questions etc then it's best to post to llvm-dev. We have a call each Thursday at 4pm GMT, via <https://meet.google.com/ske-zcog-spp>. I've created a shared calendar which may help

Hi, In our CMake build system there are currently two ways of specifying which LLVM sub projects to build by setting CMake cache variables. * Setting `LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS` to the list of projects to enable (e.g. `-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;compiler-rt`) * Setting `LLVM_TOOL_<PROJECT>_BUILD` boolean CMake cache variables (e.g. `-DLLVM_TOOL_CLANG_BUILD=ON

[Cross-post to llvm-dev to make sure everybody relevant sees this] Hi, I'm currently trying to simplify the libc++/libc++abi/libunwind build systems and testing setup. In doing so, I am encountering issues related to "unusual" ways of building them. By unusual, I just mean "not the usual monorepo build with LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS". I would like to pin down what the set of

Hi folks, Building any LLVM project currently requires invoking CMake inside <monorepo-root>/llvm, while setting the projects to enable in the LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS variable. This has the downside that CMake processing for the LLVM subproject happens even when one doesn't really need or want it. It's also not great from a build hygiene perspective, as LLVM globally sets some flags

On 08/21/12 16:49, Jim Grosbach wrote: > > I like that. Possibly with the addition that we can filter by a specific property. -Winfer=neverHasSideEffects, e.g., would only show when that specific property is inferred. > > Beyond that, I don't see an alternative to an audit of the instructions that get flagged by such a warning. :( This proposal would certainly make my life easier

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Evandro Menezes <emenezes at codeaurora.org> wrote: ... > Figure 3.3 on page 16 of www.x86-64.org/documentation/abi.pdf is not > normative. See foot note 7 in the same page. Figure 3.4 on page 21 > confirms that the use of a frame-pointer is optional. > > So, if one doesn't use ENTER in the prologue and uses RSP to access local >

Thanks Shoaib for a great summary. To summarize this as an answer to Louis' questions: 1. What is a "Standalone build"? What does it enable that a normal monorepo build can't? This means building any of the runtimes separately, where the runtime's CMakeLists.txt (e.g. path/to/my/llvm-project/libcxx/CMakeLists.txt) is the top-level one. The reason for using this variant is

On 06/18/2020 11:27 AM, Steven Wu via llvm-dev wrote: > I like the proposal but I would like to go even further. If we are going to create a top level CMake file, we should just go ahead and eliminate all the standalone build configuration. The standalone build should just be `cmake <monorepo-root> -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=standalone-project ...`. That means less build configuration to

Sebastian, If not a test, how about a patch in the documentation for TableGen about this new feature that you're making available? -- Evandro Menezes Austin, TX emenezes at codeaurora.org Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc is a member of the Code Aurora Forum On 06/20/12 16:02, Sebastian Pop wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Villmow, Micah<Micah.Villmow at

On Aug 22, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Evandro Menezes <emenezes at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 08/21/12 16:49, Jim Grosbach wrote: >> >> I like that. Possibly with the addition that we can filter by a specific property. -Winfer=neverHasSideEffects, e.g., would only show when that specific property is inferred. >> >> Beyond that, I don't see an alternative to an audit

Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > The first layout is older, and the second is newer. Going forward, > things are likely to move around. The second layout is more flexible > because it doesn't put any repo inside another repo, so I would > recommend adopting it. At the very least, using it will put you in a > good position to adapt to any