similar to: [LLD] [WASM] wasm/function-index.test failing

I cannot reproduce this error, but this could be real. David, is this reproducible every time or is this flaky? On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:03 PM Heejin Ahn via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello David, > > I use x86_64 and it works on my machine. I also can't find this error on > LLVM buildbot page. I'd appreciate if you help me reproduce the problem.

wasm-ld is currently unable to link a shared wasm library (generated with `wasm-ld --shared`) with .o files and produce a working executable. I'm curious if there's a fundamental reason for this, or is this simply something that wasn't needed and could be implemented if needed. I think this could be done by - Resolving "GOT.mem" and "GOT.func" imports and

Using LLVM v5, my Cone compiler (https://github.com/jondgoodwin/cone) automatically directly generated all functions as named and exported for both wasm text and binary files (not using clang/lld etc, but using the API). Upgrading to LLVM v7, generated wasm object files now fail, exhibiting markedly different behavior, behavior that varies between the text and binary files. For example, the

(Currently using a build from november but I didn't see any commit that could fix this for wasm); With the wasm backend, %2 = icmp sgt i8 %0, -1 becomes: i32.const $4=, 255 i32.const $2=, 255 i32.and $3=, $0, $2 i32.const $5=, 255 i32.and $6=, $4, $5 i32.gt_s $7=, $3, $6 Which essentially does

It's a wasm testcase that ends up with a 1 mb executable; after 15 minutes I killed it, it doesn't do anything (note that it's waiting on a conditional variable in ALL threads) On Wed, May 8, 2019, at 14:32, Brian Cain wrote: > Are you sure it's not just taking "a long time"? If that build machine doesn't have enormous amounts of memory you could end up with a

Hi, when linking with lld/wasm with a symbol like: @_typeinfo__rtti_te_Module6_d_Test = private constant i8* bitcast (@_rtti_te_Module6_d_Test to i8*), section "ELRTTLRR", align 4 How do I get the start and end of the ELRTTLRR section? LLD doesn't seem to emit that info, nor does it define a __start_ELRTTLRR/__stop_ELRTTLRR section?

Apologies if there is a better forum for these questions. Please redirect me if so. I’ve been using the clang/wasm-ld tools to experiment with some basic examples, and there’s a couple things I’m wrestling with. 1) How to denote a function as the “start” function (https://webassembly.github.io/spec/core/binary/modules.html#start-section) 2) How to avoid the defaulted __heap_base global. I’ve

On a 12" MacBook (2017) with 2 cores I get lld/wasm to be stuck in: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/carlokok/1a14e7ed3dbbd54511e1f0b3a7d684ff/raw/19267560b584ca42cc66f44f508df5b34102d803/thread%2520for%2520waiting It seems the outer for loop exhausts the thread pool, and the inner ones trigger a new parallel for which never finishes because the pool is full. Is this a bug or am I

Hi Sam, Thanks for your answer! Sorry I didn't really know how to process, but this issue block me to make some legacy C code works without having some glue with a bit static lib ;( (The change have really low risk) The changes I used locally to make dlopen/dlclose et dlsym mechanism works :) : Index: wasm/Writer.cpp =================================================================== ---

Can you link to docs about the wasm object format? (both relocatable and executable) Also, traditional object file linkers are primarily concerned with concatenating binary blobs with small amount of patching of said binary blobs based on computed virtual (memory) addresses. Or perhaps to put it another way, what traditional object file linkers do is construct program images meant to be mapped

Hi Sam, First, I want to know the symbol resolution semantics. I can imagine that that is set in stone yet, but just that you guys are still discussing what would be the best semantics or file format for the linkable wasm object file. I think by knowing more about the format and semantics, we can give you guys valuable feedback, as we've been actively working on the linker for a few years

Hello, Can you check whether your build includes r317710 <https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk at 317710>? Thanks, Dan On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:51 AM, Carlo Kok via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > (Currently using a build from november but I didn't see any commit that > could fix this for wasm); With the wasm backend, > > > %2 = icmp

Hello, The table generated by lld (Wasm target) have a max size. So this make impossible to add some others functions in the table . As for the moment only one Table is available in WAsm this is the only way to add function in a dynamic way. Having a none static size of the table is useful for a kind dynamic loader/inker at run-time: by adding some exported functions coming from another

Sam Clegg via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: >> Can you elaborate on semantically what the linker is actually doing for >> wasm? > > You are correct that the wasm linker does have more work to do than a > traditional linker. There are more sections that the linker will need > to re-construct fully. This is because there is more high level >

Hi llvmers, As you may know, work has been progressing on the experimental WebAssembly backend in llvm. However, there is currently not a good linking story. Most the of existing linking strategies (i.e. those in the emscripten toolchain) involve bitcode linking and whole program compilation at link time. To improve this situation I've been working on adding a wasm backend for lld. My

Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < > rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sam Clegg via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: >> >> >> Can you elaborate on semantically what the linker is actually doing for >> >> wasm? >> > >> >

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Sorry for the belated response. I was on vacation last week. A couple of > thoughts on this patch and the story of webassembly linking. And I'm about to be on (mostly) vacation for next 3 weeks :) > > - This patch adds a wasm support as yet another major architecture besides >

Somehow I wish not all parts of a libc but parts that can be provided without a JavaScript wrapper for .wasm can be provided from llvm's libc (leaving a stab implementation for the rest like file system). I've put together a minimal libc on [1] so using a 26kb .wasm binary file one can decode both PNG and JPG using this [2] simple to integrate JavaScript code, can be easily ported in other

Hi, Sorry if you've seen this message before on llvm.discourse.group or elsewhere -- I've been trying to get to the bottom of this for a while now and asked about this in a few different platforms before. I'm currently trying to debug a bug in a LLVM-generated Wasm code. The bug could be in the code that generates LLVM (rustc) or in the LLVM, I'm not sure yet. LLVM IR and Wasm

Hi there, I am trying to JIT a rather big wasm bytecode program to x86 native code and running into this JIT compilation time issue. In the first stage, I use MCJIT to translate wasm bytecode to a single LLVM IR Module which ends up with 927 functions. Then it took a pretty long time to apply several optimization passes to this big IR module and finally generate x86 code. What should I do to