similar to: Undefined symbols with inline functions using the ORC JIT on Linux

Hi Stefan, Thanks for your reply. I tried running my simple example on Linux using lli and it does work fine. So I think the best long-term solution is to migrate my code to the new lazy orc jit. Unfortunately, even the simplest example does not work on Windows: int main() { return 0; } This is the output: JITDylib "<main>" (ES: 0x000001b6e4ad3670): Search order: [

No, the problem is that Finalized is true. It is set to true at the start of the finalize() method. That's why I added a test causing that line to be executed if the symbol's address is zero... On Tue, 17 Sep 2019, 00:05 Lang Hames, <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > > Oof. I don't know what this is yet, but I bet it's going to be awful. > Quick apology

Hello LLVM-Mailing list, in the past I was using the MCJIT (if I understand it correctly) to load IR modules, compile them and execute them. The speciality of this JIT was, that it was writing the compiled code into a shared memory - for a different process to execute them. For that task the JIT used a 'custom' memory manager, memory mapping and also resolved undefined references itself.

I have found the cause of our problems with implicit template instantiation, and it looks to me like a bug in Orc JIT in LLVM 8. (Perhaps Lang could confirm?) We use createLegacyLookupResolver() to create our symbol resolver, passing it a lookup function. Amongst other things, our function calls LegacyRTDyldObjectLinkingLayer::findSymbol() to look up symbols in the JIT. When a module is

I tree to compile the LLVM ORC JIT examples. But I'm stuck in some problems I can't solve my own. First at all I compile with C++14 enabled with latest stable LLVM and clang, this means 4.0.1. I get the following error. Do I missed some specific compile option? Compilation looks like this here. |CompilingcontribJIT.cpp PWD:/home/ikuehl/projects-llvm/TurboLisp/domainEngineer

Well, I agree the front end must be responsible for (not) instantiating the function templates. However the problem shows up only when JIT compiling, for some reason, and only with LLVM 8. Is there perhaps something else that needs to be done before resolving symbols, in addition to running constructors, to ensure that instantiated function templates are taken into account? Or perhaps there is

Hi all, hi Lang It's a little late to report issues for release_50, but I just found that thing while porting my JitFromScratch examples to 5.0. This is a really nifty detail, but (if I'm not mistaken) the function signature of RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer::NotifyLoadedFtor is incorrect: $ grep -h -r -A 1 "using NotifyLoadedFtor"

To try to find out why it was crashing, I followed the trail of function calls: C:\llvm\examples\Kaleidoscope\Orc\initial\toy.cpp auto ExprSymbol = J.findUnmangledSymbol("__anon_expr"); JITSymbol findUnmangledSymbol(const std::string Name) { return findSymbol(mangle(Name)); } JITSymbol findSymbol(const std::string &Name) { return CompileLayer.findSymbol(Name,

Hi Christian Your use case seems to have similar requirements as remote JITing in ORC. So far I haven't used that part myself and I am sure Lang can tell you much more about it. However, this comment on the RemoteObjectClientLayer class sounds promising for your questions (1) and (2): /// Sending relocatable objects to the server (rather than fully relocated /// bits) allows JIT'd code

Hi, I am getting following assertion failure when attempting to remove a module. /llvm/ExecutionEngine/Orc/CompileOnDemandLayer.h:311: llvm::Error llvm::orc::LegacyCompileOnDemandLayer<BaseLayerT, CompileCallbackMgrT, IndirectStubsMgrT>::removeModule(llvm::orc::VModuleKey) [with BaseLayerT =

I needed to be able to update stub pointers for hot functions that get recompiled in a lazy JIT that uses CompileOnDemandLayer. In order to do this I added a method that allows pointers to be updated but does not expose any of the other internals of the COD layer. Does anyone have a cleaner way to do this? Has something to facilitate this already been added? Would it be possible to merge this

Firstly, apologies if this is not the right place to be asking this question--feel free to point me in the correct direction. I could be doing something wrong here but stackoverflow didn't feel like the correct place for this since there's so little there about LLVM ORC. Basically, I have a reproduction case (below) where if I throw an exception before I call JITSymbol::getAddress()

Hi All, Just a couple of updates this week: First: there is a preview patch up at https://reviews.llvm.org/D75838 to enable use of JITEventListeners in RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer. I've only done very preliminary testing on it, but was able to debug simple JIT'd programs on Linux using the GDB registration listener. If you've been wanting to move to ORC but held up by lack of debugger /

Hi David, This looks like bad eh-frame data due to a failure to fix up the frame descriptor entries: <debug: adding frame> EHFrameAddr: 0x7feae5827000, EHFrameLoadAddr: 0x00000000e5827000, EHFrameSize: 60 ==64588==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x7feae5827020 (pc 0x7feae886d970 bp 0x000000000001 sp 0x7ffca10e75f8 T0) Eyeballing the code in RuntimeDyldELF (vs

+Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com>, Master Regent of the Three <No, Two sir> JITs On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:31 PM Sean Ogden via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I needed to be able to update stub pointers for hot functions that get > recompiled in a lazy JIT that uses CompileOnDemandLayer. In order to do > this I added a method that allows pointers to

Hi, I'm attempting to port some code which uses the GlobalMappingLayer in the Orc JIT. This code worked fine in LLVM 4, but I'm getting a compile error with LLVM 5. I think the problem is that this layer hasn't been modified to account for some of the changes made in LLVM 5, but I wanted to make sure that I wasn't missing something. I have code which looks like this:

Hi David, Thanks very much for that. I'll continue to dig in as time permits, and I'll update the bug report with my progress once it's filed. Cheers, Lang. On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:42 PM, David Lurton <dlurton at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Lang. I think I'll go the bug creation route. I have an email out > to llvm-admin requesting an account on bugs.llvm.org.

I am upgrading our JIT application to use LLVM 6.0.0, and with this transition I am making the move to use the new MCJIT facility. A problem I am encountering is that the math functions from libm are not resolved/found. I am using the lambda resolver from the KaleidoscopeJIT class which first searches the present modules and, if that is unsuccessful, continues the search in the whole process

Hi David, Sorry to hear. Has anyone followed up with you yet? I've continued to dig in to this in my spare time and I've found the issue. It's a use-after-free, rather than any sort of memory smashing. ORC is currently failing to deregister the EH-frame section when the JIT is torn down (but *is* deallocating the memory for it). Normally that's not disastrous (though it does

Hi, I am working on using LLVM to compile parts of longrunning PostgreSQL queries into native code for faster code execution. As postgres is, nearly, entirely written in C and has long-lived (5 years) supported branches (making the higher API stability important), I'm currently using the C API. I started out using MCJIT but it looks like that's slowly on the way out. My current concern