similar to: EmitTargetCodeForMemSet & LTO issue

Hi Teresa, Thank you for the help, adding the "used" attribute worked just fine. It made me realize that the memset function is never inlined by the LTO optimization even without my implementation of the "EmitTargetCodeForMemSet" method. I supposed that the passes dealing with the memset function happen too late, is that correct? Thank you again, Romaric On Fri, Aug 28, 2020

Hi all, I'm working in a company to port LLVM on their own processor. I'm trying to run the test-suite, but it seems that it is usually run directly on the processor which is tested. In my case, I cannot run it on the processor, but I have a simulator on which I would like to run the test-suite. Also, it seems to me that the test-suite start by compiling some tools that have to be run

Hi everyone, I'm working in a company to port LLVM on their own processors. I'm try to support several set of instructions and several architectures. I'm using the "--target" options to choose my set of instructions, and I would like to use the "-mcpu" to choose the architecture of which I want to compile the code. Does it seem right? But at the moment I cannot

Hi, I have an issue with some builtins that are reordered (during instructions selection it seems) with others instructions and/or others builtins. Is it normal? How could I prevent it from happening? Thanks, Romaric

Hi, I'm working on OpenCL and I'm using clang as compiler (based on clang 3.7.0). I have a issue, I'm generating a bitcode file (that I can print before before the generation). But when I'm trying to read it again with clang, I have this issue: "error: Invalid record" How can I managed to know where it comes from? Thank you, Romaric Here is what is print before the

Hi all, The goal of the series is to give a chance to the architecture to validate VIRTIO device features. The tests are back to virtio_finalize_features. No more argument for the architecture callback which only reports if the architecture needs guest memory access restrictions for VIRTIO. I renamed the callback to arch_has_restricted_virtio_memory_access, and the config option to

Hi all, What's the current status of Attributor? How far is it from being enabled by default? Thanks, Alexey -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200828/0abd04c3/attachment.html>

unfortunately after re-installing 2.3.11.3, those broken-pipe errors appear again. (on different, new files) so for sure there is something broken with zlib. I will go back to2.3.10.1 now. attached is the configuration file, though it did not change between 2.3.10.1 and 2.3.11.3 Robert Am 26.08.2020 um 09:42 schrieb Robert Nowotny: > I had 4 broken mdbox files for 4 different users. >

We're considering implementing [debuginfod]( https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html) library in LLVM. Initially, we'd like to start with the client implementation, which would enable debuginfod support in tools like llvm-symbolizer, but later we'd also like to provide LLVM-based debuginfod server implementation. debuginfod uses HTTP and so we need an HTTP library, ideally one

I am tracking a problem with ThinLTO on Linux using gold and elf files where there is a disconnect between gold’s treatment of comdat groups and ThinLTO’s decisions about which weak references to convert to available externally. The net result is a definition is lost and a relocation entry is not handled. My status is summarized: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32980 Anyone familiar with

+LLDB Dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> as well for visibility. +Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> since he and I have talked about such things. On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:26 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > [+debug info folks, just as FYI - since the immediate question's more > about 3rd party library deps than the nuances of DWARF, etc] > >

Hi llvm-dev, I recently updated the WebAssembly TargetTransformInfo to allow functions with different target feature sets to be inlined into each other, but I ran into an issue I want to get the community's opinion on. Since WebAssembly modules have to be validated before they are run, it only makes sense to talk about WebAssembly features at module granularity rather than function

This looks similar to the problem I fixed awhile back in r292408. I'll take a look (probably tomorrow since I am taking some vacation today). Teresa On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:43 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > +Teresa > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 9:20 AM David Callahan via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> I am tracking a

Hi, I wanted to get the linked result in LLVM bitcode format. With LTO, this can be done by -flto -Wl,-plugin-opt,emit-llvm. Instead of generating native executables, it outputs a file with bitcode format. Does this still work with -flto=thin? -flto=thin -Wl,-plugin-opt,emit-llvm outputs a bitcode file, but its file size is too small, and does not contain all contents. What is the correct way

David, That's right, WebAssembly does not have a way to conditionally use a feature or even do runtime feature testing right now. It's on our roadmap of things to design and standardize, but it is still a long way off. > Another direction would be to require the features to be specified consistently for all components of the build, I guess - if that's the net effect anyway. Would

> On Aug 29, 2020, at 6:53 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > >> >> Sorry for the delay responding Leonard. I don’t really understand your rationale here. A PLT entry is a completely target specific concept because some targets don’t have PLTs. I don’t think there is any reason that a frontend would abstractly generate this unless they already have a

Hello, I am sending the following proposal to discuss issues and solutions regarding data races in concurrent ThinLTO processes. This caught my attention when we encountered a race condition in ThinLTO with caching. While looking into how ThinLTO deals with the problem of cache files reads/writes/deletes I spotted a lot of problems: some of them are related to data races, others - to

Hi Katya Thanks for investigating this. Here is my thought inline. > On Mar 22, 2018, at 1:32 AM, katya.romanova at sony.com wrote: > > > Hello, > > I am sending the following proposal to discuss issues and solutions regarding data races in concurrent ThinLTO processes. > > This caught my attention when we encountered a race condition in ThinLTO with caching. >

Le jeu. 22 mars 2018 à 16:46, Steven Wu <stevenwu at apple.com> a écrit : > Hi Katya > > Thanks for investigating this. Here is my thought inline. > > On Mar 22, 2018, at 1:32 AM, katya.romanova at sony.com wrote: > > > Hello, > > I am sending the following proposal to discuss issues and solutions > regarding data races in concurrent ThinLTO processes. >

Hi! I have a little problem with the given phone... Do someone know it? My problem is that I'd like to display the name of the caller (if it is saved in the address book, of course), but it always display just the number... Thanks Luca Bertoncello (lucabert at lucabert.de)