similar to: [RFC] Introducing an explicit calling convention

Hi All, I am observing something i suspect is a misbehaviour of the register allocator which impacts the performance of patchpoints. This occurs in the context of an abstract machine which in some places uses inline caches. The problematic code looks like this: entry: ; Initialize the abstract machine %db = call create_big_seldom_used_database() ; do a lot of things which increases register

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47790 Bug #: 47790 Summary: sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-3.3.0 - black screen on second nouveau display Classification: Unclassified Product: xorg Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

David Chisnall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > I'm not opposed to this in principle, and actually I'd quite like to > move in this direction and remove our reliance on undocumented and > inconsistent conventions between the back end and the front end for > conveying information about ABIs. For example, returning two 32-bit > integers or a pair of

Hello community ! I have posted here my shorewall recipe: http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/AqueosShorewall If anyone is interested please test and comment to see if we can improve it ! :) I also updated my facter recipe for VERIO vps servers if anyone interested... :) http://reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/AqueosFacterVps Hope that helps ! -- Cordialement, Ghislain

Sorry to air this in public, but sometimes people need to be publicly shamed. "Frej Jensen" <frej@legespace.dk> This user is spewing the sobig worm around the net. I have received over 20 messages so far today. Most to me at both my former address, and my current address. I matched the IP address from my mail servers logs to his cable modem address used when posting a message to

I am trying to make R-1.8.1 on (SunOS shell1 5.8 Generic_108528-15 sun4u sparc SUNW,UltraAX-i2). I did ./configure make Configure output seems ok. The make proceeds until the following line appears, repeated indefinitely (until I break): ./config.status: ./confstat28489-19881/subs.frag: cannot overwrite existing file I suspect that this may involve write permissions (and maybe the umask set in

Hi all, I've run into a couple bugs recently that affected stackmap liveness analysis in various ways: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=19224 - function arguments stay live unnecessarily http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21265 - eflags can end up as a live out http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21266 - %rip can end up as a live out The first two have nothing to do with stackmaps

I think what's happening is BranchFolder::MaintainLiveIns is using a forward analysis on top of these missing kill flags, and updating the BB-live-ins/live-outs with an incorrect set of registers. Then when the stackmaps liveness analysis happens, it's not doing anything wrong, but it starts with the wrong set of live registers and will propagate those to the point of the

Hi dev list, I am currently exploring the integration of AMDGPU/ROCm into the PACXX project and observing some strange behavior of the AMDGPU backend. The following IR is generated for a simple address space test that copies from global to shared memory and back to global after a barrier synchronization. Here is the IR is attached as as1.ll The output is as follows: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

On Oct 22, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > On 10/22/13 10:34 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote: >> On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: >> >>> On 10/17/13 10:39 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: >>>> This is a proposal for adding Stackmaps and Patchpoints to LLVM. The >>>> first client

On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > On 10/17/13 10:39 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: >> This is a proposal for adding Stackmaps and Patchpoints to LLVM. The >> first client of these features is the JavaScript compiler within the >> open source WebKit project. >> > I have a couple of comments on your proposal. None of these

On Oct 22, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com> wrote: > On Oct 22, 2013, at 1:48 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > >> On 10/22/13 10:34 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote: >>> On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 10/17/13 10:39 PM, Andrew Trick wrote:

On 10/22/13 10:34 AM, Filip Pizlo wrote: > On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > >> On 10/17/13 10:39 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: >>> This is a proposal for adding Stackmaps and Patchpoints to LLVM. The >>> first client of these features is the JavaScript compiler within the >>> open source WebKit project.

Dear All My MSc was about implementing some kind of On stack replacement in LLVM to enhance security by obfuscating running code periodically. I've tried to implement this job in JIT, but I couldn't. So I implemented it in interpreter, as an initial step. However, now I'm trying to make it in JIT. My first step is to extract function state at an arbitrary point. So, I interrupt

Hi all, I don't know if I understand everything, but it seems really interesting for a runtime developer, stackmap and patchpoint looks perfect for a lot of optimizations :) I just have few question to verify if I understand what are these stackmaps and patchpoints, and I discuss the GC after. * I have a first very simple scenario (useful in vmkit). Let's imagine that we want to lazily

I'm moving this to a different thread. I think the newly proposed intrinsic definitions and their current implementation are valuable regardless of how it gets tied into GC... On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Philip R <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support

I have a few questions about the new ORC JIT. I saw Lang Hames (hi!) excellent talk at the llvm-dev meeting a few weeks ago. The ORC JIT is undergoing some API changes and I'd like/need to take advantage of them. (1) How do I take ownership of the ObjectFile once the ORC JIT has created it? I'd like to take ownership of object files generated by the ORC JIT so that I can save them to

On 10/17/13 10:39 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > This is a proposal for adding Stackmaps and Patchpoints to LLVM. The > first client of these features is the JavaScript compiler within the > open source WebKit project. > I have a couple of comments on your proposal. None of these are major enough to prevent submission. - As others have said, I'd prefer an experimental namespace

Adding Gael as someone who has previously discussed vmkit topics on the list. Since I'm assuming this is where the GC support came from, I wanted to draw this conversation to the attention of someone more familiar with the LLVM implementation than myself. On 10/22/13 4:18 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > On Oct 22, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com > <mailto:fpizlo

Is there an explanation anywhere of what code that uses a stack map looks like? I'm interested in writing a garbage collector, but it's not clear to me how my code should make use of the stack map format to actually locate roots in memory. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: