Displaying 20 results from an estimated 600 matches similar to: "Attempt to build MLIR."
2020 Jan 13
2
Attempt to build MLIR.
These errors seem pretty pervasive for me on a clean build. It appears
that it arises because when tablegen'd headers are included in a .h file,
every place where that .h file is used needs a dependency on the
corresponding IncGen targets. This seems broken in the short term and
unmaintainable in the long term. There really needs to be a way of
automatically generating the right
2019 Oct 29
4
GitHub Access Request
Hi Tom,
I do not have SVN account, for accessing LLVM.
Thanks,
Sourabh
On Tue 29 Oct, 2019, 9:08 AM Tom Stellard, <tstellar at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 10/26/2019 03:39 AM, Sourabh Singh Tomar wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I recently requested Chris regarding commit access to LLVM.
> > He asked me to wait till the GitHub migration completes and then ask in
>
2019 Sep 10
2
Dwarf - 5 features in clang and llvm
> On Sep 10, 2019, at 6:15 AM, Djordje Todorovic via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sourabh,
>
> Support for call-site related DWARF 5 tag/attributes is implemented very late, in the LLVM middle-end.
> Please note that there is also the IR-level flag (DIFlagAllCallsDescribed) that lowers to
> the DW_AT_call_all_calls.
>
> There is also
2019 Sep 11
3
Dwarf - 5 features in clang and llvm
Hello Djordje, Vedant,
Thanks a lot for sharing information.
I have a doubt, please consider the following simple test case-
#include <iostream>
int func(int* ptr){
std::cout << *ptr;
return *ptr + 5;
}
int main(int argc, char** argv){
int a = 4;
int* ptr_a = &a;
int b = func(ptr_a);
return 0;
}
commandline used --
bash$ clang++
2019 Oct 09
3
DebugInfo work contribution and update.
Thanks, David for updating us.
Regarding, mail address, can use anyone{@gmail or @amd}. but
sourav0311 at gmail.com works best for me for mailing lists related stuff.
Regarding, GDB side of DWARFv5 side of things, we've testing GDB-8.3 WRT
DWARFv5 clang and gcc binaries to get better idea of debuggability of clang
generated binaries with GDB.
Primary motivation being GDB better handling of
2020 Nov 12
2
[DebugInfo]Crash during building openmpi4.0.0
Hi folks,
While building openmpi.4.0.0(Optimized debug build), using trunk clang we encountered a crash(assertion failure).
Initially assertion seems trivial:
[...]
void llvm::DwarfExpression::addFragmentOffset(const llvm::DIExpression*): Assertion `FragmentOffset >= OffsetInBits && "overlapping or duplicate fragments"' failed.
[...]
But, narrowing to RC. We discovered
2020 Feb 13
6
About OpenMP dialect in MLIR
Hi,
I have few questions / concerns regarding the design of OpenMP dialect in
MLIR that is currently being implemented, mainly for the f18 compiler.
Below, I summarize the current state of various efforts in clang / f18 /
MLIR / LLVM regarding this. Feel free to add to the list in case I have
missed something.
1. [May 2019] An OpenMPIRBuilder in LLVM was proposed for flang and clang
frontends.
2020 Apr 01
2
Question WRT llvm.dbg.value
> On Apr 1, 2020, at 2:56 AM, Sourabh Singh Tomar <sourav0311 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Do you mean documenting the desired frontend behavior, or adding some verifier in
> LLVM? A warning for the latter is that SROA may currently emit IR that contains a
> mix of declares and values for different fragments of an aggregate variable, so I
> assume that is something that
2019 Sep 10
2
Dwarf - 5 features in clang and llvm
Hello All,
I was working on some dwarf-5 features and debugging optimized code support
in clang and llvm.
Noticed that, DW_TAG_call_site is supported in llvm middle-end. but clang
is not emitting these.
I was hoping, if someone could provide current status of these features and
current status of dwarf-5 features in clang and llvm.
That will be immensely helpful.
Thanks!
Sourabh.
--------------
2020 Mar 30
3
Question WRT llvm.dbg.value
> On Mar 30, 2020, at 4:13 AM, Jeremy Morse via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sourabh,
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 8:09 AM Sourabh Singh Tomar via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> Under what circumstances should a frontend choose to emit(at -O0(No optimization)) llvm.dbg.value for a local variable.
>>
>> I
2020 Nov 13
1
[DebugInfo]Crash during building openmpi4.0.0
Thank You for suggestion Adrian!
Generated reproducer for the crash using clang reproducer and CReduce.
::Attachment:: C file.
NIT: some clean up is done on this file just to silent some compiler warnings(like implicit declaration etc.)
Crash can be reproduced using above test case with following commandline:
$clang -g -O3 -mllvm –enable-partial-inlining creducegenerated-cleaned.c -c
---CRASH---
2020 Feb 15
5
[flang-dev] About OpenMP dialect in MLIR
Reply to Kiran Chandramohan:
> You are welcome to participate, provide feedback and criticism to change
the design as well as to contribute to the implementation.
Thank you Kiran.
> But the latest is what is there in the RFC in discourse.
I have used this as reference for the response.
> We did a study of a few constructs and clauses which was shared as mails
to flang-dev and the
2020 Feb 17
3
[flang-dev] About OpenMP dialect in MLIR
Please find the reply inline below
On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 12:59 AM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 10:42 AM Vinay Madhusudan via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Reply to Kiran Chandramohan:
>>
>> > You are welcome to participate, provide feedback and criticism to
>> change the
2019 Oct 09
4
DebugInfo work contribution and update.
Hi llvm-dev, cfe-dev,
It's been a while since our team is investigating DebugInfo in LLVM, we're
looking forward to contribute and enhance in LLVM DebugInfo.
We,'ve been investigating mostly on DWARF-5 aspects -- couple of them to
mention--
1. Language aspects
2. Location mostly optimized out ones
3. DebugInfo conformance to DWARF-5
To avoid getting conflicted with some body
2020 Feb 18
2
[flang-dev] About OpenMP dialect in MLIR
Please find the reply inline below:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:02 AM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 10:29 AM Vinay Madhusudan <vinay at compilertree.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Please find the reply inline below
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 12:59 AM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
2019 Sep 13
2
DWARF-5 Supported languages Tags C++03, C++11,C++14
Hello Everyone,
I'm working on providing support for New Language Tags, prescribed in
DWARF-5.
DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_03
DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_11
DW_LANG_C_plus_plus_14
While, C++11 and C++14, is defined and can be emitted by Frontend.
"include/clang/Basci/LangStandard.h"
CPlusPlus = (1 << 5),
CPlusPlus11 = (1 << 6),
CPlusPlus14 = (1 << 7),
CPlusPlus17 = (1 <<
2020 Sep 01
4
Filename's in DIBuileder
Try using $PWD/test.cpp on the clang command line. I am seeing the duplicate DIFile entries, but not yet able to reproduce a .debug_line section with multiple directory entries.
--paulr
From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Tomar, Sourabh Singh via llvm-dev
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 1:07 PM
To: Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com>; cfe-dev at
2020 Mar 30
3
Question WRT llvm.dbg.value
Hello Everyone,
I have general question WRT llvm.dbg.value intrinsic function semantics.
Under what circumstances should a frontend choose to emit(at -O0(No
optimization)) llvm.dbg.value for a local variable.
I saw some debuginfo code in flang(older one), sort of it choose to emit
*llvm.dbg.value* for *every load operation* happening on a *local
variable*. And as noted below in IR snippet it
2019 Oct 09
5
DebugInfo work contribution and update.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 11:59 AM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com>
wrote:
> Welcome Sourabh,
>
>
>
> There are many bits of DWARF-5 that haven’t been implemented.
>
Got a short list, by chance?
> I know there is currently no big push within Sony to “fill in the
> corners” for v5, as we have been more focused on quality of debug info for
> optimized
2020 Mar 31
2
Question WRT llvm.dbg.value
> On Mar 30, 2020, at 11:57 PM, Sourabh Singh Tomar <sourav0311 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > My understanding is that this isn't correct: dbg.declare specifies the
>> memory address of a variable for the whole lifetime of the function,
>> whereas dbg.value (and dbg.addr) specify the value/address until the
>> next debug intrinsic. Mixing these two kinds