similar to: [RFC] ASM Goto With Output Constraints

+ CBL mailing list On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:08 AM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > [Adding the correct cfe-dev mailing list address.] > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:06 AM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Now that ASM goto support has landed, Nick Desaulniers and I wrote up a >> document describing how to expand clang's

I think this is fine, except that it stops at the point where things actually start to get interesting and tricky. How will you actually handle the flow of values from the callbr into the error blocks? A callbr can specify requirements on where its outputs live. So, what if two callbr, in different branches of code, specify _different_ constraints for the same output, and list the same block as a

What about SelectionDAG representation? Currently we expand callbr to INLINEASM_BR and BR. Both of which are terminators. But in order to support outputs we would need to put CopyFromReg nodes between them. ~Craig On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:18 PM Nick Desaulniers via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > + CBL mailing list > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:08 AM Bill

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:44 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:29 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> > wrote: > >> I think this is fine, except that it stops at the point where things >> actually start to get interesting and tricky. >> >> How will you actually handle the flow of values from the callbr

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 1:48 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:00 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:44 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:29 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> >>> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:25 PM Finkel, Hal J. <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > On 7/1/19 1:38 PM, Bill Wendling via llvm-dev wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:35 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:53 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 1:48 PM James Y

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:35 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:53 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 1:48 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:00 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> >>> wrote:

On 6/28/19 5:35 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote: On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:53 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com<mailto:isanbard at gmail.com>> wrote: On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 1:48 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com<mailto:jyknight at google.com>> wrote: On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 3:00 PM Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com<mailto:isanbard at

I've been out of the loop for awhile. Is there an email thread about the "removing terminators as a thing" concept? On Wed, Oct 31, 2018, 10:13 PM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org wrote: > FWIW, I’m generally supporting of this direction, and would love to see > asm goto support. > > Could you compare and contrast asmbr to a couple other

(and FWIW, I'm currently trying to finish the patch that makes this a reality... mostly hard because it has to unwind a loooot of complexity we've built up due to not having this) On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 5:47 PM Jeremy Lakeman via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/123407.html > > TLDR; CallInst & InvokeInst

Hello, Whenever I compile a C program containing "FD_SET" function using llvm-gcc 2.7 (with -emit-llvm option), I got the following inline assembly in my llvm byte code: %asmtmp = call %struct.__mbstate_t asm sideeffect "cld; rep; stosl", "={cx},={di},{ax},0,1,~{dirflag},~{fpsr},~{flags},~{memory}"(i32 0, i32 32, i32* getelementptr inbounds (%struct.__sigset_t*

Summary ======= There is a need for dedicated continuation-passing style (CPS) calls in LLVM to support functional languages. Herein I describe the problem and propose a solution. Feedback and/or tips are greatly appreciated, as our goal is to implement these changes so they can be merged into LLVM trunk. Problem ======= Implementations of functional languages like Haskell and ML (e.g., GHC

> The semantics around inlining alone are problematic enough to warrant serious hesitation. There are nicer ways to embed CPS call/return into LLVM; I just figured that there would not be much support for adding a new terminator because it would change a lot of code. Ideally we would have a block terminator like: cps call ghccc @bar (.. args ..) returnsto label %retpt Where the

> Is there a reason you can't use the algorithm from the paper "A Correspondence between Continuation Passing Style and Static Single Assignment Form" to convert your IR to LLVM's SSA IR? Yes, there are a few reasons. Undoing the CPS transformation earlier in the pipeline would mean that we are using LLVM's built-in stack. The special layout and usage of the stack in

I don’t really have a good enough feeling for the landingpad syntax yet to comment on the most natural way to extend it yet, but creating a synthetic cleanup function to call from the personality function is what I was thinking. With the current (trunk +/- a couple of weeks) clang, compiling for an “x86_64-pc-windows-msvc” target, I’m seeing a landingpad that looks like this: lpad:

HI, When compiling the open-source software cryptopp (https://www.cryptopp.com/#download <https://www.cryptopp.com/#download>) version 5.6.4 I found a strange issue with the IR generated. The issue only appears when compiling with -O2 optimisation in the integer.cpp file (the function is _ZN8CryptoPPrsERNSt3__113basic_istreamIcNS0_11char_traitsIcEEEERNS_7IntegerE ->

Hi, docs seem to be broken. e.g. r353563 adds docs for callbr, but https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html doesn't have it. trying to build the docs manually on my box: ninja docs-llvm-html FAILED: docs/CMakeFiles/docs-llvm-html cd /usr/local/google/home/kcc/llvm-build/docs && /usr/bin/sphinx-build -b html -d /usr/local/google/home/kcc/llvm-build/docs/_doctrees-llvm-html -q -W

Hello guys, I have these models class Farmer < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :cows end class Cow < ActiveRecord::Base set_table_name :cows belongs_to :farmer end ... graph = Farmer.find(x) # Retrieves four cows of x graph.cows[1].name = "Trottolina" graph.save while adding a new cow to collection works perfectly fine, ActiveRecord doesn''t

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:51:42AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:30:40 -0800 Kees Cook wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 10:53:44AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:21:39 -0600 Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > > > This series aims to fix almost all remaining fall-through warnings in > > > > order to enable

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:51:42AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:30:40 -0800 Kees Cook wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 10:53:44AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:21:39 -0600 Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > > > This series aims to fix almost all remaining fall-through warnings in > > > > order to enable