similar to: Difference when compiling human readable IR vs bitcode with clang frontend

Going from IR <-> BC does not seem to create a difference. IR -> BC -> IR -> BC, either with clang frontent or by using llvm-as and llvm-dis yields identical bc files. I have only been able to reproduce this issue when emitting to an object file. > On 18 Jan 2019, at 18:09, <paul.robinson at sony.com> <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > > > >>

This is a silly question, but I am in a situation where I need to build x86 and arm assembly sources for some sources while the rest will be built with C. I do know that just adding `-fembed-bitcode` to a C sources would embed bitcode, but doing the same for the assembly files will not do that (at least, it will add the 1-byte `_LLVM,__asm` section, but not the `__LLVM,__bitcode` section).

Apple has some internal implemenation for embedding bitcode in the object file that we would like to upstream. It has few changes to clang frontend, including new clang options, clang driver changes and utilities to embed bitcode inside object file. We believe upstreaming these implementations will benefit the people who would like to develop software on Apple platform using open source LLVM. It

Hi Peter It is not currently related because we started the implementation before Thin-LTO gets proposed in the community but our "__LLVM, __bitcode" section is pretty much the same as ".llvmbc" section. Note ".llvmbc" doesn't really follow the section naming convention for MachO objects. I am hoping to unify them during the upstream of the implementation.

Hi everyone I am still in the process of upstreaming some improvements to the embed bitcode option. If you want more background, you can read the previous RFC (http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-February/094851.html <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-February/094851.html>). This is part II of the discussion. Current Status: A basic version of -fembed-bitcode option

Seems like something infinite-recursion like to me: $ clang --version clang version 6.0.0 (trunk 317833) Target: powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu $ clang -c test.ll warning: overriding the module target triple with powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu [-Woverride-module] ... #255 0x0000000012b07a78 llvm::DwarfUnit::getOrCreateTypeDIE(llvm::MDNode const*) ... So I'd say it reproduces. On Wed, Nov 15,

Thanks for your quick reply. Here its is: =========== ; ModuleID = 'simple_foo.c' source_filename = "simple_foo.c" target datalayout = "e-m:o-i64:64-f80:128-n8:16:32:64-S128" target triple = "x86_64-apple-macosx10.13.0" ; Function Attrs: noinline nounwind optnone ssp uwtable define i32 @foo(i32 %a, i32 %b, i32 %c) #0 { entry: %retval = alloca i32, align

Hi all, I'd like to propose changes to how we do promotion of global values in ThinLTO. The goal here is to make it possible to pre-compile parts of the translation unit to native code at compile time. For example, if we know that: 1) A function is a leaf function, so it will never import any other functions, and 2) The function's instruction count falls above a threshold specified at

I just reported this bug: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35314 This very simple IR is causing infinite recursion in llvm::DwarfUnit::getOrCreateTypeDIE in llvm 5.0.0. Is there a workaround? Is anyone willing to save me a recompile and check if this is fixed in 5.0.1 or trunk? `clang -c test.ll` repros the issue. ; ModuleID = 'test' source_filename = "test" target

I believe if you pass(iirc) -pass-remarks-missed=“gisel-*”, it’ll print the instruction it failed to legalize. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 11, 2017, at 6:44 PM, S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Thanks for your quick reply. > > Here its is: > > =========== > > ; ModuleID = 'simple_foo.c' > source_filename

Thanks for the feedback! Replies inline. > On Jun 12, 2016, at 11:44 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Steven, > > Great to see the commentary and updates here. I've got a few questions about some of this work. It might be nice to see some separate RFCs for a couple of things, but we'll figure that out after you send out patches probably :)

> On Apr 6, 2016, at 9:40 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk <mailto:peter at pcc.me.uk>> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 6,

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose changes to how we do promotion of global values in > ThinLTO. The goal here is to make it possible to pre-compile parts of the > translation unit to native code at

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose changes to how we do promotion of global values in > ThinLTO. The goal here is to make it possible to pre-compile parts of the > translation unit to native code at

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 3, 2016, at 10:01 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >>

Hi , Currently GobalIsel like FastIsel designed to use fallback to DAGIsel in case of failure. You can use -global-isel-abort=2 option. llc -global-isel -pass-remarks-missed="gisel-*" -global-isel-abort=2 simple_foo.ll Regards, Igor From: S. Bharadwaj Yadavalli [mailto:bharadwajy at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 03:36 To: Aditya Nandakumar <proaditya at

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com <mailto:davidxl at google.com>> wrote: >> >>

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 12:39 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com <mailto:davidxl at google.com>> wrote: >> >> >>

> On Feb 5, 2016, at 2:14 PM, James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Steven Wu via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > "__LLVM, __cmdline" is used to store the clang command-line options. There are > few options that are not reflected in the bitcode that we would

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 9:40 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com <mailto:tejohnson at google.com>> wrote: >> >> >>