similar to: xen unstable build domU kenel fails on entry.S

Hi Rafael, I've been staring at the CFI directives and have a question. Some background: I want to generate the compact unwind information using just the CFI directives. I *think* that this should be doable. The issue I'm facing right now is that I need to know how much the stack pointer was adjusted. So when I have something like this: .cfi_startproc Lfunc_begin175:

On 5 September 2013 19:27, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > I've been staring at the CFI directives and have a question. Some background: I want to generate the compact unwind information using just the CFI directives. I *think* that this should be doable. The issue I'm facing right now is that I need to know how much the stack pointer was

Hi, Compiling a simple function with the 3.0 SVN branch llc produces .s output containing cfi_startproc, cfi_endproc, cfi_def_cfa_offset that gcc refuses to compile (OS X 10.7 on X86-64) with the following error: test.s:6:Unknown pseudo-op: .cfi_startproc test.s:10:Unknown pseudo-op: .cfi_def_cfa_offset test.s:10:Rest of line ignored. 1st junk character valued 51 (3). test.s:38:Unknown

Hello, I've made changes to the prologue to not spill callee saved gprs to the stack but rather spill them to unused vector registers. I'm not sure how to handle this in the cfi directives. Originally, we would use cfi_offset to give an offset of where it is saved on the stack. I tried to instead use the cfi_restore directive. As the docs say ".cfi_restore says that the rule

Really sorry I missed this. Just found it looking for something else in my inbox. I think we should support this but * We should still err on other identifiers ".cfi_startport bar" is invalid. * If I read the gas documentation correctly, the effect of "simple" is to skip the initial cfi instructions. We should test if that is the case and implement it too. Accepting and

Hello, Nathan > or if it should be a configure test, which might be safer. Are there > any x86 platforms (other than apple) that don't need PLT-indirect calls? Yes, mingw. However just tweaking the define is not enough - we're not loading address of GOT into ebx before the call (on 32 bit ABIs) thus the call will be to nowhere. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of

Hi, :If I compile this file with debugging enabled (clang/LLVM TOT) int main() { } I get the error Error: inconsistent uses of .cfi_sections From the 2.27 binutils assemblers. It seems that 2.27 doesn't like the .cfi_sections .debug_frame directive following previous .cfi directives. The assemblers seem to be happy if the .cfi_sections directive precedes any other .cfi directive. Is

Dear All, I'm getting the following error on Mac OS X when compiling C++ code in the LLVM test suite: g++ Output/minisat.llc.s -o Output/minisat.llc -lm -m64 -fomit-frame-pointer -mdynamic-no-pic -lstdc++ -lm Output/minisat.llc.s:5:Unknown pseudo-op: .cfi_startproc Output/minisat.llc.s:8:Unknown pseudo-op: .cfi_def_cfa_offset Output/minisat.llc.s:8:Rest of line ignored. 1st junk

On 19/08/2009, at 4:00 AM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hello, Nathan > >> or if it should be a configure test, which might be safer. Are there >> any x86 platforms (other than apple) that don't need PLT-indirect >> calls? > Yes, mingw. However just tweaking the define is not enough - we're not Ok, so configure might be the way to go then, maybe something

Hi Xiaolong, > As Duncan described, "lli -load=libstdc++.dylib ..." works. I, > however, encounted an "Illegal instruction" message, while I was > trying to interpret a large program. are you using the interpreter or the JIT? So, does lli have a debug switch > for dumping out the details for errors? > > Using llc is not that simple, and I have not gotten

A pv guest will not reboot after migration, the guest itself does everything right, including the shutdown, but xl does not recreate the guest, it just shuts it down. This goes for 2.6.39 and 3.0.4 guest kernels, havent tried different ones. I also haven tried different xen versions. Dont know if this would affect hvm, probably not since qemu leaves the guest running and does a

Hi, I have successfully installed Xen unstable binary on SuSE 9.3. I am trying to do a source install and I got the following error. Will be glad for any help or guidance. In file included from include/asm-xen/asm/processor.h:18, from include/asm/thread_info.h:17, from include/linux/thread_info.h:21, from include/linux/spinlock.h:12, from include/linux/capability.h:45, from

Hi all, I've encountered a couple of minor build issues on Solaris that have crept in since 2.5, fixes below: 1. In lib/Target/X86/X86JITInfo.cpp, there is: // Check if building with -fPIC #if defined(__PIC__) && __PIC__ && defined(__linux__) #define ASMCALLSUFFIX "@PLT" #else #define ASMCALLSUFFIX #endif Which causes a link failure due to the non-PLT

Thanks Duncan and Ashok, As Duncan described, "lli -load=libstdc++.dylib ..." works. I, however, encounted an "Illegal instruction" message, while I was trying to interpret a large program. So, does lli have a debug switch for dumping out the details for errors? Using llc is not that simple, and I have not gotten through the compilation process. For instance, "llc -o

On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Stephan Tolksdorf <st at quanttec.com> wrote: > Hi, > > When clang/LLVM can't prove that a noexcept function only contains > non-throwing code, it seems to insert an explicit exception handler that > calls std::terminate. Why doesn't clang leave it to the eh personality > function to call std::terminate when an exception is thrown

The code in X86TargetLowering::IsEligibleForTailCallOptimization() has this part: // The callee has to preserve all registers the caller needs to preserve. const X86RegisterInfo *TRI = Subtarget.getRegisterInfo(); const uint32_t *CallerPreserved = TRI->getCallPreservedMask(MF, CallerCC); if (!CCMatch) { const uint32_t *CalleePreserved = TRI->getCallPreservedMask(MF, CalleeCC);

I get some failing tests from compiler-rt. FAIL: cfi :: cross-dso/stats.cpp (30831 of 30893) ******************** TEST 'cfi :: cross-dso/stats.cpp' FAILED ******************** Script: -- /usr/local/google/home/prazek/llvm-build-release/./bin/clang -fuse-ld=gold -flto -fsanitize=cfi -fwhole-program-vtables --driver-mode=g++ -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso -fvisibility=default -DSHARED_LIB -fPIC

----- Original Message ----- > From: "vivek pandya" <vivekvpandya at gmail.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, "Quentin Colombet" > <qcolombet at apple.com>, "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com> > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 5:02:44 AM >

Hello Mentors, I did analyze assembly files generated for IPRA + PGO. (1) I observed that I did not considered the scope of the optimization so changing callee saved register set for non local function is bad because IPRA can not pass this information to other modules. (2) applying this change to indirect function also has no effect because for such case IPRA is currently not able to propagate

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Evgenii Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com > wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Evgenii Stepanov > <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> Thanks for sending this out. A few comments below. > >> > >> On