similar to: LLJIT vs. thread-local storage

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "LLJIT vs. thread-local storage"

2019 Dec 20
2
LLJIT vs. thread-local storage
Argh. Thanks for the info. We're on Linux. On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 3:46 PM Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > Gathering from past, I remember that the ORCv2 doesn't support thread > local variable but not sure what is the current status now. What platform > you are on? > CC'ed (Lang hames) he knows exactly what is the
2019 Dec 20
2
LLJIT vs. thread-local storage
And yet the same C++ code using thread-local variables works fine (or seems to) when compiled with Orc v1. Does the change to the Orc API really make thread-local storage more difficult? On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 3:52 PM Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, I think Linux don't have support for TLS. > > On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 20:19, Geoff Levner
2019 Dec 20
2
LLJIT vs. thread-local storage
Yes, I confirm. Le ven. 20 déc. 2019 à 19:12, Praveen Velliengiri < praveenvelliengiri at gmail.com> a écrit : > Hi, > Orc v2 is different from the internal structure then Orc v1 not just in > API level. > TLS support is not in ORC for a long time at least I'm aware of , Could > you please confirm that ORC v1 actually compiles and run the code with > Thread locals?
2019 Dec 20
3
LLJIT vs. thread-local storage
This had also came up at llvm-devmtg briefly at the JIT roundtable. One of the collaborators on my project had started a patch years ago to implement some of it https://reviews.llvm.org/D8815, but then we went a different direction with TLS in our frontend and it became unnecessary. On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 12:36 PM David Blaikie via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > +Lang
2019 Dec 20
3
LLJIT vs. thread-local storage
I don't think it's especially hard, but just not specifically unimplemented because nobody's had a strong need for it. There's probably some combinations of code models and machines that does happen to work (e.g. emutls+linux+large-code+large-data+no-PIC). Julia has some support for thread locals, but as a JIT in control of the language we currently try to generate better code than
2020 Sep 28
2
LLVM Developers Meeting JIT BoF -- Request for Topics of Interest
Hi Geoff, We use LLJIT. Do addObjectFile() and StaticLibraryDefinitionGenerator work > for ELF objects? They do. :) I've not tested StaticLibraryDefinitionGenerator extensively on Linux. but we have a regression test checking basic usage. If you run into any trouble at all please file a bug and assign it to me. -- Lang. On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 2:05 PM Geoff Levner <glevner at
2020 Sep 28
2
LLVM Developers Meeting JIT BoF -- Request for Topics of Interest
Hi Geoff, Importing symbols into the JIT from an object file or static library...? Sure! Are you interested in doing this with the C API, LLJIT, or raw OrcV2 components? The high-level answer here (which we can dig into further in the BoF) is: For object files: - For raw OrcV2 components you'll want to create an RTDyldObjectLinkingLayer or ObjectLinkingLayer and use the 'add'
2019 Dec 19
2
Moving to ORCv2 - Compiling debuggable code?
I too am in the process of porting our ORC code to ORC v2 and LLJIT. The new API allows me to remove much of our own code, which can only be a good thing. I sometimes get crashes, however, when executing my JIT compiled function, so I thought I would use gdb to try to figure out what is going wrong. And I am dismayed to see that there seems to be no way to provide an event listener to register
2019 Dec 19
2
Moving to ORCv2 - Compiling debuggable code?
Dear Geoff, As for as ORCv2 is concerned, there is no event listener facility available as of now. Thanks On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 01:21, David Blaikie via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > +Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> the author/owner of the ORC JIT - though > he's out of teh office at the moment I think, so might not get a reply > until the new year
2020 Aug 07
2
JIT interaction with linkonce_odr global variables
Hello, I recently hit an issue when JIT'ing my generated IR using llvm::orc::LLJIT. My IR contains the following definition of a global variable: > $_ZZ23TestStaticVarInFunctionbE1x = comdat any > @_ZZ23TestStaticVarInFunctionbE1x = linkonce_odr dso_local global i32 123, > comdat, align 4 > And in my host process, there exists the same symbol. I would expect LLJIT to resolve the
2020 Sep 24
2
ORC JIT - Can modules independently managed with one LLJIT instance? + problems with ExecutionSession.lookup
Hey Lang, I would be really happy to only have one LLJIT instance and using multiple JITDylibs. However… it seems like that I don’t know enough to use them. So I wonder… 1. When I add Module A to JITDylib A and Module B to JITDylib B – where will those look for undefined symbols? Will Module A for example: will it only search itself and the MainDylib? Or would it also search in JITDylib B?
2020 Apr 20
2
ORC JIT Weekly #12
Hi All, There was only one interesting ORC-specific commit this week: A new example showing how to initialize and de-initialize JITDylibs has been added in llvm/examples/OrcV2Examples/LLJITWithInitializers. The Extensible RTTI system (https://reviews.llvm.org/D39111) that I posted a while back has landed. While this is not ORC specific, I expect it to be used in upcoming patches to allow ORC
2019 Aug 08
6
New ORC v2 LLJIT - global variables
We are trying to switch to the new orc v2 lljit engine at my work with hopes of parallel jitting. We are switching from the ExecutionEngine w/ OrcMCJitReplacement. We are having a hard time with global variables. We have found a way to create/emit new globals during jitting by using the old ExecutionEngine::getOrEmitGlobalVariable. Is there an easier way to do this with the new jit engine? We were
2020 Sep 23
2
ORC JIT - Can modules independently managed with one LLJIT instance? + problems with ExecutionSession.lookup
Hi Lang, Thank you for your answer! This helped me again a lot!! Also that ResourceTracker is a really neat feature! Looking forward to it! :3 I changed the title cause… there is another issue I have (sorry about that…) I’m finally allowed to investigate the ORC JIT for integration into our system, which meant I got a few days to actually play around with it. However, another problem arise
2019 Aug 19
3
[ORC] Removing / replacing JITDylibs
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)
2020 Sep 16
4
OrcV1 removal
Hi All, I've updated the orcv1 removal branch ( https://github.com/lhames/llvm-project/tree/orcv1-removal) with an initial patch for removable code. If anyone wants to follow along with the development or share thoughts on the design you're very welcome to. I'll be adding tests and comments this week, but for anyone who wants to take an early look the main elements are defined in
2020 Sep 28
2
LLJIT vs. thread-local storage (again)
Hmm, I'm confused. The DSO is compiled with gcc. Do I need to compile it with clang instead? I don't believe the JITted code uses the thread support library directly, although I suppose it may be hidden with templates and/or inline functions... On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 10:43 PM Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Geoff, > > If you want to access the variable
2020 Feb 24
4
ORC JIT Weekly #6 -- General initializer support and JITLink optimizations
Hi All, The general initializer support patch has landed (see 85fb997659b plus follow up fixes). Some quick background: Until now ORC, like MCJIT, has handled static initializer discovery by searching for llvm.global_ctors and llvm.global_dtors arrays in the IR added to the JIT. This approach suffers from several drawbacks: 1) It provides no built-in support for other program representations:
2020 Sep 28
2
LLVM Developers Meeting JIT BoF -- Request for Topics of Interest
Hi Andres, A topic that I'd find interesting is what it'd take to make it easier to > use profile guided optimization in the context of JIT. A few years back > I crudely hacked this together, but it was fairly ugly. It'd be nice to > make that easier. Possibly too complicated for that type of session? We couldn't go into detail, but we could kick off a discussion and
2020 Jan 17
6
ORC JIT Weekly #1
Hi All, In the interests of improving visibility into ORC JIT development I'm going to try writing weekly status updates for the community. I hope they will provide insight into the design and state of development of LLVM's JIT APIs, as well as serving as a convenient space for discussions among LLVM's large and growing community of JIT API users. The length and detail will vary