similar to: "Freeing" functions generated with SimpleORC for JIT use-case

Hi, I wrote a compiler that generate IR code and run it on the JIT, and there randomly crashed due to "corrupted size vs. prev_size" depends on the IR code generated from the source code. Here's how I created the JIT: llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); llvm::InitializeNativeTargetAsmPrinter(); llvm::InitializeNativeTargetAsmParser(); // create jit llvm::orc::ExecutionSession

Firstly, apologies if this is not the right place to be asking this question--feel free to point me in the correct direction. I could be doing something wrong here but stackoverflow didn't feel like the correct place for this since there's so little there about LLVM ORC. Basically, I have a reproduction case (below) where if I throw an exception before I call JITSymbol::getAddress()

Trying to put together a simple test JIT compiler, using ORC which as I understand it will be the supported API going forward, I noticed that in the first chapter of the updated Kaleidoscope tutorial, there is sample code that starts like this: ExecutionSession ES; RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer ObjectLayer; IRCompileLayer CompileLayer; DataLayout DL; MangleAndInterner Mangle; ThreadSafeContext Ctx;

Hi David, This looks like bad eh-frame data due to a failure to fix up the frame descriptor entries: <debug: adding frame> EHFrameAddr: 0x7feae5827000, EHFrameLoadAddr: 0x00000000e5827000, EHFrameSize: 60 ==64588==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown address 0x7feae5827020 (pc 0x7feae886d970 bp 0x000000000001 sp 0x7ffca10e75f8 T0) Eyeballing the code in RuntimeDyldELF (vs

Hi Lang, thank You very much. I've used Your code and the creating of the object file works. I think the problem is after creating the object file. When I link the object file with ld I get an executable, which is working right. After changing the clang and llvm libraries from the package control version (.deb) to a own compiled version with debug options, I get an assert() fault. In void

Dear LLVM-Developers and Vinod Grover, we are trying to extend the cling C++ interpreter (https://github.com/root-project/cling) with CUDA functionality for Nvidia GPUs. I already developed a prototype based on OrcJIT and am seeking for feedback. I am currently a stuck with a runtime issue, on which my interpreter prototype fails to execute kernels with a CUDA runtime error. === How to use the

Hi David, Thanks very much for that. I'll continue to dig in as time permits, and I'll update the bug report with my progress once it's filed. Cheers, Lang. On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:42 PM, David Lurton <dlurton at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Lang. I think I'll go the bug creation route. I have an email out > to llvm-admin requesting an account on bugs.llvm.org.

Hi, I think ExecutionEngine as a common interface for both Interpreter and MCJIT is almost useless in the current form. There are separated methods in ExecutionEngine for similar or the same features provided by Interpreter and MCJIT, i.e. to get a pointer to function you should call getPointerToFunction() for Interpreter or getFunctionAddress() for MCJIT. Personally, I'm using MCJIT and

Hi David, Sorry to hear. Has anyone followed up with you yet? I've continued to dig in to this in my spare time and I've found the issue. It's a use-after-free, rather than any sort of memory smashing. ORC is currently failing to deregister the EH-frame section when the JIT is torn down (but *is* deallocating the memory for it). Normally that's not disastrous (though it does

Hi all, I am following the LLVM JIT tutorial API based on: https://llvm.org/docs/tutorial/BuildingAJIT1.html I have 2 independent questions: 1. The tutorial mentions that "*will defer compilation of the module until any of its definitions is looked up*". Does that mean to force eager compilation, i have to keep track of all functions added to the Module and do a lookup? I want the

Hi, I'm working on a runtime autotuner that utilizes ORCv2 JIT (I'm closely tracking tip-of-tree), so linking new object files and patching in the new function(s) will happen frequently. One of the concerns my runtime system has is the ability to do one of the following: (1) replacement of the contents of a JITDylib with a new object file [to provide semi-space GC-style reclaiming], (2)

I tree to compile the LLVM ORC JIT examples. But I'm stuck in some problems I can't solve my own. First at all I compile with C++14 enabled with latest stable LLVM and clang, this means 4.0.1. I get the following error. Do I missed some specific compile option? Compilation looks like this here. |CompilingcontribJIT.cpp PWD:/home/ikuehl/projects-llvm/TurboLisp/domainEngineer

Hi all, hi Lang It's a little late to report issues for release_50, but I just found that thing while porting my JitFromScratch examples to 5.0. This is a really nifty detail, but (if I'm not mistaken) the function signature of RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer::NotifyLoadedFtor is incorrect: $ grep -h -r -A 1 "using NotifyLoadedFtor"

I am upgrading our JIT application to use LLVM 6.0.0, and with this transition I am making the move to use the new MCJIT facility. A problem I am encountering is that the math functions from libm are not resolved/found. I am using the lambda resolver from the KaleidoscopeJIT class which first searches the present modules and, if that is unsuccessful, continues the search in the whole process

Hi Bjoern, CCing cfg-dev (since that's where the conversation started) and llvm-dev (since it's relevant there). Do you know if there is a way to obtain the fully resolved obj-code? I > wanted to load the functions into a shared memory, but how? The only thing > I receive is a function pointer, but I don't know how large the function > 'behind' is. Even a call to

Hi Alex, loading the symbols explicitly helped. With this the build process doesn't need any additional linker flags. Very nice. Thanks, Frank On 06/28/2018 04:38 PM, Alex Denisov wrote: > Hi Frank, > > If I am not mistaken it doesn't look in the whole process space by default. > Please, try loading all the symbols explicitly: > >

Hi, I'm currently working my way through the tutorial with LLVM 3.9.1 on Windows (finished chapter 4) and stumbled over a few things which could be improved: - "LLVMContext" does not exist as a variable -> "TheContext" - Chapter 3: 5 times - Chapter 4: 1 time - Chapter 5: 4 times - Chapter 6: 2 times - Chapter 7: 2 times 3.4. Function Code

Hi Kevin, Koffie, We will start migrating to ORC for next release, but for now, this release > invoke delete after remove right? MCJIT's removeModule method does not delete the module. You'll need to do that manually. OrcMCJITReplacement is a bug-for-bug compatible implementation of MCJIT using ORC components, so it does not free the memory either. Does this mean MCJIT is

Hi, for my application (uses Builder and MCJIT) I am making the transition LLVM 6.0 -> 8.0. It runs fine for self-contained functions, but whenever a jit-ed function contains calls to the math library (e.g. @cosf) it seems to have problems getting the address after successfully finding the symbol: Failure value returned from cantFail wrapped call UNREACHABLE executed at

Hi Christian Your use case seems to have similar requirements as remote JITing in ORC. So far I haven't used that part myself and I am sure Lang can tell you much more about it. However, this comment on the RemoteObjectClientLayer class sounds promising for your questions (1) and (2): /// Sending relocatable objects to the server (rather than fully relocated /// bits) allows JIT'd code