similar to: The builtins library of compiler-rt is a performance HOG^WKILLER

"Craig Topper" <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote: > None of the "si" division routines will be used by x86. That was my expectation too. > They exist for targets that don't support the operations natively. > X86 supports them natively so will never use the library functions. So they SHOULD not be built (or at least not shipped) with the builtins library

This fixes a long standing issue where it was not possible to do "make usr/klibc/arch/x86_64/longjmp.o" in the kernel. The principle is that all .o files to be part of klibc are listed with klib-y. For each directory a klib.list file is made that specify all .o file and the final AR then adds all .o files to create libc.a. This patch introduce the infrastructure and converts x86_64 to

> On 06/08/2014 02:58 PM, Ady wrote: > >> > >> To be clear, I am not saying there is no bug - there might be. > >> > > > > I performed the following test with several versions of Syslinux: > > > > 1_ Execute: > > 'extlinux --once=non_default_label --install /mnt/sda1' ; > > 2_ In first reboot, the

On 06/09/2014 02:58 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > Actually, it looks more like this might be the problem: > > Info: Symbol __muldi3 is defined more than once > Info: Symbol __divdi3 is defined more than once > Info: Symbol __udivmoddi4 is defined more than once > Info: Symbol __ashrdi3 is defined more than once > Info: Symbol dev_stdcon_w is defined more than once >

"David Greene" <dag at hpe.com> wrote: > Stefan Kanthak via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > >> "Michael Kruse" <llvmdev at meinersbur.de> wrote: >> >>> I think David is not referring to the capitalization of file names, but to >>> "DUPLICATE", "WASTING", "NOT AMUSED",

"Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Stefan, > > I can't tell if you're intentionally trolling, or are simply oblivious, > but to this observer you have clearly crossed well over the line of > acceptable behavior. Since you seem to have some experience in taking the point of view of a third person: do you find LLVM's

The attached patches are against the v0.114 release and cover some of the tweaks I made while playing about testing ARM and Thumb support. Please review and consider applying. Even with the patches, ARM dynamic linking doesn't seem to work and the Thumb test applications seem to have shaken out a Thumb bug in the 2.4.21-rmk2 kernel which I'm still trying to track down. Still more fun to

Hi @ll, BUGS #1 & #2: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The installer LLVM-10.0.0-win64.exe dumps the following DUPLICATE files in "C:\Program Files\LLVM\bin", WASTING about 500MB disk space, which is nearly a third of the disk space occupied by the whole package: | DIR "C:\Program Files\LLVM\bin" /O:-S ... | 25.03.2020 12:15 83.258.880 clang-cl.exe | 25.03.2020 12:03

"Michael Kruse" <llvmdev at meinersbur.de> wrote: > I think David is not referring to the capitalization of file names, but to > "DUPLICATE", "WASTING", "NOT AMUSED", "BOGUS" etc. I EMPHASIZE in the only way possible with plain text. > It should be possible to report problems in a professional manner. It should also be possible

Hi, I'm trying to do a build and install on Windows 10 with Visual Studio 2015 Community Edition for the X86 and ARM targets, from the current release_40 branch. While compilation completes without error, the INSTALL target fails with the following error: 54> CMake Error at projects/compiler-rt/lib/builtins/cmake_install.cmake:34 (file): 54> file INSTALL cannot find 54>

Hello > The bitcode was generated by llvm-gcc v2.6 for Mingw32/x86, which is > available for download at the llvm site. > Please let me know, if i should tell more. Well, the answer is pretty obvious then. These calls are not generated by JIT. They are already in your bitcode - they are generated by llvm-gcc. The purpose of these calls were alreade explained by Eli. You should either

Compile the following functions with "-O3 -target i386" (see <https://godbolt.org/z/VmKlXL>): long long div(long long foo, long long bar) { return foo / bar; } On the left the generated code; on the right the expected, properly optimised code: div: # @div push ebp | mov ebp, esp | push dword ptr [ebp + 20] | push

Objects compiled for the MS-ABI don't conform to it! Data types beyond 64 bit MUST BE returned by the callee via the hidden first argument allocated by the caller, NOT in XMM0! Demo/proof: from this source --- llvm-bug.c --- #ifndef __clang__ typedef struct { unsigned __int64 low; unsigned __int64 high; } __uint128_t; #else __attribute__((ms_abi)) #endif __uint128_t

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1272 ------- Comment #9 from dtucker at zip.com.au 2007-02-19 23:22 ------- Another thought: do you have multiple instances of libgcc? Perhaps one in /usr/local/lib and one elsewhere? ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Is there any specific reason why the clang_rt.builtins-${arch} library is disabled for windows builds? if (NOT WIN32) foreach(arch x86_64 i386 arm) if(CAN_TARGET_${arch}) set_source_files_properties(${${arch}_SOURCES} PROPERTIES LANGUAGE C) add_compiler_rt_runtime(clang_rt.builtins-${arch} ${arch} STATIC SOURCES ${${arch}_SOURCES} CFLAGS

hi everybody, when trying to cross compile openssh-4.6 i got the following error : --------------------- /opt/sparc-linux/bin/sparc-linux-ld -o ssh ssh.o readconf.o clientloop.o sshtty.o sshconnect.o sshconnect1.o sshconnect2.o -L. -Lopenbsd-compat/ -L/opt/sparc-linux/lib -L/usr/src/SparcV8Linux/zlib-1.2.3-L/opt/sparc-linux/sparc-linux/sys-include/ -lssh -lopenbsd-compat -lresolv -lcrypto -lutil

Hi, Here is a fix for some missing libgcc magic in the ia64 build. A recent problem with udev uncovered this. PPC needs a similar fix. Olaf will send a patch, I imagine. Both unified diff and bk diff (for Bryan) are attached. mh -- Martin Hicks Wild Open Source Inc. mort@wildopensource.com 613-266-2296 -------------- next part -------------- # User: mort # Host:

Hi @ll, while clang/LLVM recognizes common bit-twiddling idioms/expressions like unsigned int rotate(unsigned int x, unsigned int n) { return (x << n) | (x >> (32 - n)); } and typically generates "rotate" machine instructions for this expression, it fails to recognize other also common bit-twiddling idioms/expressions. The standard IEEE CRC-32 for "big

On Sat, 29 Jun, at 01:57:58AM, Igor Sverkos wrote: > Hi, > > Matt Fleming wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Jun, at 01:52:00PM, Helmut Hullen wrote: > >> Thanks - now it crashes later ... > > > > What crash are you seeing? > > > >> I don't have the ia64 files which are needed for a complete binary. But > >> maybe that's only my special

I have updated the klibc patchset based on feedback received. In particular, the patchset has been reorganized so as not to break git-bisect. Additionally, this updates the patch base to 2.6.17-git12 (d38b69689c349f35502b92e20dafb30c62d49d63) and klibc 1.4.8; the main difference on the klibc side is removal of obsolete code. This is also available as a git tree at: