similar to: Problem about API difference between LLVM3.5 and LLVM3.9

Hi everyone, I am trying to call an LLVM intrinsic (llvm.pow.f32), inserted with the following call: std::vector<llvm::Type *> arg_types;arg_types.push_back(llvm::Type::getFloatTy(context));auto function=llvm::Intrinsic::getDeclaration(module, llvm::Intrinsic::pow, arg_types);auto result=ir_builder->CreateCall(function, args); When I try to execute the code generated by the JIT

Hi Andrew, this sounded a plausible explanation, because the X86 processor does not have an instruction to calculate the power function. So I tried the llvm.sin.f32 intrinsic, as the X86 processor family does have an instruction for that, but I still get the same problem. While you may still be right, there is at least something else going on as well. Thanks for your input, though. Taco.

>> I am happy to start writing a patch for the documentation > > Thanks. Please Cc me for review. Will do. >> # LLVM_BUILD_* values available only from LLVM build tree. > > Those were created to simplify building Clang locally against a > LLVM build tree. Clang needs the LLVM source and build trees too, > so this gives it that information. No information is

Dear all, I have a table with a column named "type" and I ''d like to access the type field of the correspondant model object but I get a deprecation warning when I use the following code : modelObject.type "type deprecated use class instead" How can I access such a named field in rails ? Johan Johan Duflost Analyst Programmer Belgian Biodiversity Platform (

Hello; I am working on porting a tool written for LLVM3.5 to LLVM10. There used to be a call instruction with the signature static CallInst * Create (Value *F, Value *Actual, const Twine &NameStr="", Instruction *InsertBefore=0) Can anyone please explain what it supposed to do? What was F and Actual? Thank you so much. -- Dr. Arnamoy Bhattacharyya R&D Compiler Engineer

Hi All, I've been playing [1] with the newly introduced CMake interface for using exported LLVM CMake targets (e.g. the LLVMSupport library) in CMake projects and although it works there are a few things I think we should fix before the LLVM 3.5 release. Here are the current issues I see that I'd like to discuss. Just to clarify by "Targets" I mean targets in the CMake sense

Currently we have an OCaml library for generating the qemu command line (used only by ‘virt-v2v -o qemu’). However we also generate a qemu command line in ‘lib/launch-direct.c’, and we might in future need to generate a ‘-readconfig’-compatible configuration file if we want to go beyond 10,000 drives for scalability testing. Therefore this patch series reimplements the qemu command line code as

Hi all, I compiled the *llvm3.9* source code on the *Nvidia TX1* board. And now I am following the document in the docs/CompileCudaWithLLVM.rst to compile cuda program with clang++. However, when I compile `axpy.cu` using `nvcc`, *nvcc* can generate the correct the binary; while compiling `axpy.cu` using clang++, the detailed command is `clang++ axpy.cu -o axpy --cuda-gpu-arch=sm_53

Hi, I noticed that the LLVM 3.5 release branch landed recently. I have a few patches (these are all part of my recent work to fix up the CMake interface) that I'd like in both LLVM3.5 release branch and trunk that I'd like to commit Is there any policy on how should do this be done, or can I just commit the patch to both trunk and then the release branch with identical commit messages?

This changes the infrastructure to allow the target_file to be a QEMU URI. Rich.

Some time ago we reported a compile-time performance regression in the LiveIntervals analysis pass (see http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18580). We detected it at first after migrating from LLVM 3.1 to 3.3, but the problem persists also in 3.5. This regression is especially critical when compiling long functions. In one of our benchmarks compile time goes from 200s (in 3.1) up to 1500s (in

1. Yes, you both are right. My platform is Jetson TX1, AArch64. 2. And I obtain all the necessary files for TX1 by JetPack from the host(X86) and so `nvcc` can work rightly. 3. Althrough I can compile LLVM3.9 on TX1, I can not compile the CUDA program using `clang` tools. The error is "sys/cedfs.h no such file". 2016-10-28 4:07 GMT+08:00 Justin Lebar <jlebar at google.com>:

Hi, Following on from another thread (Long-Term Support for LLVM Projects Extension to Build System) I'd like to discuss the testing of the exported LLVM CMake targets which can be used by consumers of LLVM as documented in [1]. Right now we don't test this feature **at all** and as a result it has been or is * broken in trunk * broken by those packaging LLVM * broken in the official

Hello, I got a problem while building llvm using cmake version 3.7 following the instructions in " http://clang.llvm.org/get_started.html ". After building for 56% it's displaying the error "make[2]: *** No rule to make target `/GetSVN.cmake', needed by `tools/clang/lib/Basic/SVNVersion.inc'. Stop. " I did notice the presence of GetSVN.cmake in the system path

> NVidia TX1 is the AArch64 Jetson board with proper GPU (we use those). Sure, I believe that others use this configuration. I was saying, "we", being, myself and those whom I work closely with, do not. Sorry if that wasn't precise. It is still not clear to me if the original poster is compiling for ARM or not. But it sounds like you're going to help them get this

QEMU for x86 supports two machine types, "pc" (emulating the ancient Intel i440FX chipset originally used by the Pentium Pro), and "q35" (https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/Q35). Currently virt-v2v does not set any machine type, so libvirt or the target hypervisor will choose some default, probably i440fx. Newer versions of libvirt and QEMU will probably switch over to defaulting

> Hi All, > Attached above my InstCount.cpp after modification. I did simple > modification which is the following (The statements between the > ************** ) : > bool InstCount::runOnFunction(Function &F) { > unsigned StartMemInsts = > NumGetElementPtrInst + NumLoadInst + NumStoreInst + NumCallInst + > NumInvokeInst + NumAllocaInst; >

On 27 October 2016 at 19:02, Justin Lebar via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, it looks like you're compiling CUDA for an ARM host? This is not > a configuration we have tested, nor is it something we have the > capability of testing at the moment. Hi Justin, NVidia TX1 is the AArch64 Jetson board with proper GPU (we use those). > You may be able to

Hi, I have some IR files which can be compiled using llc-3.0 and gcc-4.6.3. I want to instrument these IR files. My instrumentation pass is implemented under LLVM-3.5 and some data structures in LLVM-3.5 are not available on LLVM-3.0, such as *AttributeSet* in *Attribute.h*. I tried to compile my instrumentation pass under LLVM-3.0 and it failed due to missing data types. So I am asking whether

Note that one of the 8 patches (#6) will be sent separately in reply to this email, as some of the replaced lines are too long, so git won't let me send the email. However, there is nothing wrong with that patch, and it should be applied in the sequence listed below. Note also that I assume this will be tested on a clean f11 install, rather than an upgrade of an existing ovirt server