similar to: LLVMContext: Threads and Ownership.

Agreed, the existing ownership seems sub-optimal. I wouldn't say broken, but subtle at least - looks like you get the choice to either manage the ownership of the Module object yourself, or let the context handle it (eg: currently it'd be valid to just do "{ LLVMContext C; new Module(C); new Module(C); }" - Modules end up owned by the context and cleaned up there). Might be hard

In the most basic case, I'd imagine something like this: auto C = std::make_shared<LLVMContext>(); struct ModuleAndSharedContextDeleter { std::shared_ptr<LLVMContext> C; operator()(Module *M) { delete M; } /* ctor to init C */}; std::unique_ptr<Module, ModuleAndSharedDeleter> M(new Module(C.get()), ModuleAndSharedContextDeleter(C)); (or invert this and traffic in structs

Hello, I'm trying to develop a way to reliably clean the LLVMContext in order to make it possible to use it multiple times. LLVMContext itself is an almost empty object delegating almost all its content to LLVMContextImpl. This makes it very clean ideally, because clearing the LLVMContext would be as easy as deleting the LLVMContextImpl and creating a new one. The problem is that for some

Hi All, In LTO, we load in the source modules and link the source modules into a destination module. Lots of MDNodes are only used by the source modules, for example Xalan used 649MB for MDNodes after loading and linking, but the actual destination module only has 393MB of MDNodes. There are 649-393MB (40% of 649MB) not used. MDNodes belong to the Context, deleting modules will not release the

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> In LTO, we load in the source modules and link the source modules into a >> destination module. >> Lots of MDNodes are only used by the source modules, for example

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > In LTO, we load in the source modules and link the source modules into a > destination module. > Lots of MDNodes are only used by the source modules, for example Xalan > used 649MB for MDNodes after loading and linking, but the actual > destination module only has 393MB of

Hello, the need here is to have a single LLVMContext used for multiple compilations. You make a good point about that by the way. If there are outstanding users cleaning the context under their seats might still pose a risk to them, and in that case deleting + newing a new LLVMContextImpl might actually not be very different. Marcello 2014-06-24 17:14 GMT+01:00 David Blaikie <dblaikie at

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> In LTO, we load in the source modules and

Something like, keeping the compiler alive for a many compilation sessions, using the same LLVMContext, but without the problem of accumulating data in the LLVMContext that would slowly fill up the memory. This as much I can enter into details that I can :/ Probably this is also a quite common use case scenario too. Marcello 2014-06-24 18:52 GMT+01:00 Eric Christopher <echristo at

Hi Duncan, I came across something like the following recently which I guess might be related to your recent work. Any ideas? $ clang++-tot -cc1 crash_on_invalid.cpp -g -emit-obj -fexceptions -fcxx-exceptions crash_on_invalid.cpp:13:1: error: C++ requires a type specifier for all declarations x; ^ 1 error generated. *** Error in `clang++-tot': corrupted double-linked list: 0x000000000754f340

Hi, We are using the new LLJIT class in our compiler. We have not been successful using the parallel JIT feature. When we tried it previously on multiple modules, our compile-time increased significantly. I don't know if we are using it incorrectly, or that we miss out on optimizations we get when running on a single merged module, but it hasn't worked for us yet. We are pretty far behind

Hello, I'm updating a legacy code using LLVM 2.5 where it has an iteration through a Module's TypeSymbolTable to process each StructType. In LLVM 3.4, TypeSymbolTable has been removed. I can only find the LLVMContextImpl instance of a Module's LLVMContext which has AnonStructTypes and NamedStructTypes two maps. However, LLVMContextImpl is an opaque class which cannot be directly

Thanks, I am now working on compiling up VMKit. When compiling VMKit in my up-to-date svn checkout I get several error messages on missing members of the class 'llvm::Type': PNetLib.cpp: In function ‘void decapsulePrimitive(n3::VMObject*, const llvm::Type*, std::vector<llvm::GenericValue, std::allocator<llvm::GenericValue> >&)’: PNetLib.cpp:694: error: ‘Int1Ty’ is not a

Hi, (sorry if the CC's are inappropriate, they seemed relevant based on a git log of IRMover.cpp) I'm using LLVM to implement Just-in-Time compilation for PostgreSQL. One part of that is doing inlining of operators. For that I'm using bitcode pre-generated using clang. The current code uses a single LLVMContext & Orc to generate the code. That largely workes well. But inlining

Hi, On 2018-03-26 16:44:05 -0700, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: > > The second approach is to *not* cache modules but re-read them from disk > > (or memory, but that's irrelevant here). That works without any sort of > > asserts, but "leaks" memory because everytime a module is re-read from > > disk it re-creates types (cf

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink at gmail.com>wrote: > Hello all, > > I've already bothered people on IRC with this question and it was > recommended to ask it here. > > First of all, some context. In Rubinius (http://rubini.us/, > http://github.com/rubinius/rubinius) we use LLVM for our JIT. We create > LLVM IR using the C++ API and

> On 2015-Jun-02, at 12:37, Yuri <yuri at rawbw.com> wrote: > > On 06/01/2015 11:43, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >> You can round-trip to bitcode, reading the module into the >> destination context. The following pseudo-code gives the idea: >> >> bool linkModuleFromDifferentContext(Module &D, const Module &S) { >>

> On Mar 23, 2018, at 16:11, Andres Freund via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > (sorry if the CC's are inappropriate, they seemed relevant based on a > git log of IRMover.cpp) > > I'm using LLVM to implement Just-in-Time compilation for PostgreSQL. One > part of that is doing inlining of operators. For that I'm using bitcode

> On Mar 26, 2018, at 17:09, Andres Freund <andres at anarazel.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2018-03-26 16:44:05 -0700, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >>> The second approach is to *not* cache modules but re-read them from disk >>> (or memory, but that's irrelevant here). That works without any sort of >>> asserts, but "leaks" memory

Hello all, I've already bothered people on IRC with this question and it was recommended to ask it here. First of all, some context. In Rubinius (http://rubini.us/, http://github.com/rubinius/rubinius) we use LLVM for our JIT. We create LLVM IR using the C++ API and turn that into machine code using ExecutionEngine::runJITOnFunction. The resulting native code is then installed as the