Displaying 20 results from an estimated 400 matches similar to: "Purpose of Epoch Trackers"
2018 Jul 25
2
are the LLD libraries thread safe?
E.g. Is it intended to be allowed to call lld::elf::link in 2 different
threads at the same time?
Follows is an example Valgrind error I ran into when doing the above.
I'll try putting a global resource lock on invoking LLD and see if it
solves the problem.
==5467== Invalid write of size 8
==5467== at 0x525509:
llvm::DenseMapBase<llvm::DenseMap<llvm::CachedHashStringRef, int,
2018 Jul 25
2
are the LLD libraries thread safe?
Hi Andrew,
LLD relies on various bits of global state which are manipulated during the
link, so I wouldn't expect it to be thread safe at that level, although it
does attempt to reset that global state at the start of each call to
link(), so it should be callable sequentially.
Regards,
James
On 25 July 2018 at 02:37, Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
2009 Nov 03
2
[LLVMdev] DenseMap iterator constness fix
Dear all,
The first of the proposed patches (DenseMapIterator.patch) forbids implicit
conversion of DenseMap::const_iterator to DenseMap::iterator which was
possible because DenseMapIterator inherited (publicly) from
DenseMapConstIterator. Conversion the other way around is now allowed as one
may expect.
The template DenseMapConstIterator is removed and the template
parameter IsConst which
2009 Nov 04
2
[LLVMdev] DenseMap iterator constness fix
Hi Jeffrey,
You are right that the generated copy constructor is used for
const_iterator. I have added a comment clarifying this. Also I have added
the tests you suggested and corrected the comparison operators. Please find
attached the updated patches.
Best regards,
Victor
2009/11/3 Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at google.com>
> +template <bool, typename True, typename False>
>
2009 Nov 04
2
[LLVMdev] DenseMap iterator constness fix
Good catch! I meant "for iterator" of course. Attached is a corrected patch
together with an old patch for clang just to keep them together.
Could someone commit these, please?
Thanks,
Victor
2009/11/4 Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin at google.com>
> + // Otherwise this is a copy constructor for const_iterator.
>
> Do you mean "for iterator"?
>
> Otherwise,
2009 Nov 03
0
[LLVMdev] DenseMap iterator constness fix
+template <bool, typename True, typename False>
+struct If { typedef True Result; };
+
+template <typename True, typename False>
+struct If<false, True, False> { typedef False Result; };
These should probably go into include/llvm/Support/type_traits.h. In
C++0x, this is named "conditional" (section 20.6.7), so I think you
should use the same name, despite the standard
2009 Nov 04
0
[LLVMdev] DenseMap iterator constness fix
+ // Otherwise this is a copy constructor for const_iterator.
Do you mean "for iterator"?
Otherwise, looks good to me. If you can commit this, please do.
Otherwise, someone else should as I'm not going to be around tomorrow.
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Victor Zverovich
<victor.zverovich at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jeffrey,
> You are right that the generated
2020 Oct 01
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi,
On 2020-10-01 15:29:12 -0700, Lang Hames wrote:
> 24bytes / object -- Looks like I managed module ownership correctly but
> leaked the ThreadSafeModule container. This should be fixed in 5044196b412f.
That helped a bit, but not yet fully. Looks like it might be still
reachable memory, so leakcheck isn't that helpful.
Oooh. I think I see. For various reasons the symbol names we
2009 Nov 09
0
[LLVMdev] DenseMap iterator constness fix
Reminding about the patches...
Is there a problem with them or simply nobody have looked at them since?
Victor
2009/11/4 Victor Zverovich <victor.zverovich at googlemail.com>
> Good catch! I meant "for iterator" of course. Attached is a corrected patch
> together with an old patch for clang just to keep them together.
> Could someone commit these, please?
>
>
2020 Apr 16
4
ORC Assertion failure
Hi
On Windows 10 when using a debug build of LLVM 10, I get this assertion failure:
Assertion failed: (KV.second.getFlags() & ~WeakFlags) == (I->second &
~WeakFlags) && "Resolving symbol with incorrect flags", file
C:\work\github\llvm-10.0.0.src\lib\ExecutionEngine\Orc\Core.cpp, line
450
The same failure occurred in LLVM 9 too:
Assertion failed: I->second ==
2015 Jan 14
3
[LLVMdev] Crash on invalid during LLVMContext destruction MDNode::dropAllReferences
Hi Duncan,
I came across something like the following recently which I guess might be
related to your recent work. Any ideas?
$ clang++-tot -cc1 crash_on_invalid.cpp -g -emit-obj -fexceptions
-fcxx-exceptions
crash_on_invalid.cpp:13:1: error: C++ requires a type specifier for all
declarations
x;
^
1 error generated.
*** Error in `clang++-tot': corrupted double-linked list:
0x000000000754f340
2020 May 23
4
Assertion triggered when running simple hello-world code on iOS device using ORC/LLLazyJIT
Hello,
I am trying to run this basic C++ hello-world code in my iOS app that has
LLVM libraries linked in (the app runs on the actual device - iPad Pro, iOS
13.4.1).
#include <iostream>
int main (int argh, char *argv[]) {
std::cout << "Hello World!" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
So below is the break down of the steps that I do:
First I compile this code to an
2008 Oct 30
6
[LLVMdev] cygwin build problems
Cygwin's <stdint.h> defines uint32_t as "unsigned long". I think this
is valid, but it causes various problems like this when building LLVM
with GCC 3.4.4:
.../lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAG.cpp:3440: error: call of
overloaded `AddInteger(uint32_t)' is ambiguous
.../lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/SelectionDAG.cpp:1429: error: no matching
function for call to `max(long
2020 Jun 06
4
Assertion triggered when running simple hello-world code on iOS device using ORC/LLLazyJIT
Hi Lang,
Please see below is the trace.
--
Thanks,
Igor
*2020-06-06 12:05:21.016705-0400 CppDevProCompiler[6613:3000073] Running...*
*jitLink_MachO: magic = 0xfeedfacf, identifier =
"llvm-link.submodule-jitted-objectbuffer"*
*jitLink_MachO: cputype = 0x0100000c, cpusubtype = 0x00000000*
*Creating normalized sections...*
* __text: 0x0000000000000000 -- 0x0000000000000064, align:
2017 Jun 30
2
llvm-profdata determinism
I haven't tested it, but it looks to me like llvm-profdata merge (well,
InstrProfWriter specifically) would not have deterministic output.
Certainly the textual output iterates over FunctionData which is a
StringMap of SmallDenseMaps, neither of which has deterministic iteration.
The binary writing looks like it'd have similar issues - looping through
these unordered maps & writing
2020 Jun 20
1
Assertion triggered when running simple hello-world code on iOS device using ORC/LLLazyJIT
Hi Dave,
Yep. This is JITLink specific, so we could only have observed it on MachO
x86-64 or arm64 until recently. It takes a little bit of poking to get IR
to produce a zero-lengh section on MachO, but not much.
Jared Wyles recently contributed an initial JITLink ELF implementation, so
the fix seems timely -- we might have been about to see more of it.
-- Lang.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 4:02 PM
2020 Oct 02
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi Andres,
Ok -- I've added some API for this in 438db0719681: You can get the string
pool from the execution session
with LLVMOrcExecutionSessionGetSymbolStringPool, then clear that
with LLVMOrcSymbolStringPoolClearDeadEntries.
-- Lang.
On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 5:34 PM Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andres,
>
> Oooh. I think I see. For various reasons the symbol
2018 Jan 16
0
Running Scalar Evolution on Modules on an ad-hoc basis
Hello!
I am attempting to write a program which can analyze multiple llvm
modules. Specifically, I want to use scalar evolution on different
modules while being able to refer to the results across all modules thus
processed.
Ideally I don't want to do it as an LTO pass -- I don't know which modules
I need to check at the time the program starts running.
My current attempt at
2020 Oct 01
2
OrcV1 removal
Hi,
On 2020-09-30 21:31:33 -0700, Lang Hames wrote:
> I've taken a first shot at hooking RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer up to the
> ResourceTracker API in 7436b2ab2428. Could you let me know whether that
> fixes the leak you were seeing?
It did improve the situation significantly, thanks!
There's still a smaller leak, unfortunately. The function comments for
modules say that:
/**
*
2017 Jun 30
2
llvm-profdata determinism
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 7:03 PM Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 6:27 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I haven't tested it, but it looks to me like llvm-profdata merge (well,
>> InstrProfWriter specifically) would not have deterministic output.
>>
>> Certainly the textual output iterates