Search Results

Search found 211 results on 9 pages for 'llvm clang'.

Page 2/9 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  | Next Page >

  • Poor LLVM JIT performance

    - by Paul J. Lucas
    I have a legacy C++ application that constructs a tree of C++ objects. I want to use LLVM to call class constructors to create said tree. The generated LLVM code is fairly straight-forward and looks repeated sequences of: ; ... %11 = getelementptr [11 x i8*]* %Value_array1, i64 0, i64 1 %12 = call i8* @T_string_M_new_A_2Pv(i8* %heap, i8* getelementptr inbounds ([10 x i8]* @0, i64 0, i64 0)) %13 = call i8* @T_QueryLoc_M_new_A_2Pv4i(i8* %heap, i8* %12, i32 1, i32 1, i32 4, i32 5) %14 = call i8* @T_GlobalEnvironment_M_getItemFactory_A_Pv(i8* %heap) %15 = call i8* @T_xs_integer_M_new_A_Pvl(i8* %heap, i64 2) %16 = call i8* @T_ItemFactory_M_createInteger_A_3Pv(i8* %heap, i8* %14, i8* %15) %17 = call i8* @T_SingletonIterator_M_new_A_4Pv(i8* %heap, i8* %2, i8* %13, i8* %16) store i8* %17, i8** %11, align 8 ; ... Where each T_ function is a C "thunk" that calls some C++ constructor, e.g.: void* T_string_M_new_A_2Pv( void *v_value ) { string *const value = static_cast<string*>( v_value ); return new string( value ); } The thunks are necessary, of course, because LLVM knows nothing about C++. The T_ functions are added to the ExecutionEngine in use via ExecutionEngine::addGlobalMapping(). When this code is JIT'd, the performance of the JIT'ing itself is very poor. I've generated a call-graph using kcachegrind. I don't understand all the numbers (and this PDF seems not to include commas where it should), but if you look at the left fork, the bottom two ovals, Schedule... is called 16K times and setHeightToAtLeas... is called 37K times. On the right fork, RAGreed... is called 35K times. Those are far too many calls to anything for what's mostly a simple sequence of call LLVM instructions. Something seems horribly wrong. Any ideas on how to improve the performance of the JIT'ing?

    Read the article

  • Static library not included in resulting LLVM executable

    - by Matthew Glubb
    Hi, I am trying to compile a c program using LLVM and I am having trouble getting some static libraries included. I have successfully compiled those static libraries using LLVM and, for example, libogg.a is present, as is ogg.l.bc. However, when I try to build the final program, it does not include the static ogg library. I've tried various compiler options with the most notable being: gcc oggvorbis.c -O3 -Wall -I$OV_DIR/include -l$OV_DIR/lib/libogg.a -l$OV_DIR/lib/libvorbis.a -o test.exe This results in the following output (directories shortened for brevity): $OV_DIR/include/vorbis/vorbisfile.h:75: warning: ‘OV_CALLBACKS_DEFAULT’ defined but not used $OV_DIR/include/vorbis/vorbisfile.h:82: warning: ‘OV_CALLBACKS_NOCLOSE’ defined but not used $OV_DIR/include/vorbis/vorbisfile.h:89: warning: ‘OV_CALLBACKS_STREAMONLY’ defined but not used $OV_DIR/include/vorbis/vorbisfile.h:96: warning: ‘OV_CALLBACKS_STREAMONLY_NOCLOSE’ defined but not used llvm-ld: warning: Cannot find library '$OV_DIR/lib/ogg.l.bc' llvm-ld: warning: Cannot find library '$OV_DIR/lib/vorbis.l.bc' WARNING: While resolving call to function 'main' arguments were dropped! I find this perplexing because $OV_DIR/lib/ogg.l.bc DOES exit, as does vorbis.l.bc and they are both readable (as are their containing directories) by everyone. Does anyone have any idea with what I am doing wrong? Thanks, Matt

    Read the article

  • How can I fix this clang warning: "Object with +0 retain counts returned to caller where +1 (owning)

    - by mipadi
    I have a piece of Objective-C code that looks like the following: - (NSString *)copyData:(NSData *)data { NSString *path = [[[self outputDirectory] stringByAppendingPathComponent:@"archive"] stringByAppendingPathExtension:@"zip"]; NSLog(@"Copying data to %@", path); [data writeToFile:path atomically:NO]; return path; } The code is called from an initializer that looks like this: - (id)initWithData:(NSData *)data { if ((self = [super init]) != nil) { NSString *path = [self copyData:data]; // Line 41 (referenced in warning, shown below) return [self initWithContentsOfFile:path]; } return self; } When running the clang static analyzer, I get the following warnings for the path variable: Potential leak of an object allocated on line 41 and stored into 'path' Object with +0 retain counts returned to caller where +1 (owning) retain count is expected I'm confused. My understanding is that stringByAppendingPathComponent should not return an autoreleased string, so it should have a net retain count of 0. (Obviously I don't want to retain it.) I've tried altering copyData: to return the following, but it didn't get rid of the warning: return [[path retain] autorelease]; So what's the deal with this warning?

    Read the article

  • Additional macro support in clang?

    - by anon
    Since LLVM/cLang is especially well designed. This seems like a great opportunity to augment the C/C++ macro/preprocessor system. Does anyone know of additional macro/preprocessor abilities added by Clang or side projects to make the macro system more powerful (like turing complete) Thakns! Note: I am asking about macros. Not C++ templates. Readers: pleaser downvote any answers referring to templates. I want this thread to be macro/preprocessor specific.

    Read the article

  • llvm-py questions

    - by DSblizzard
    1) Is it possible to use llvm-py on Windows without Visual Studio 2008? Maybe I can compile files on another computer and use on my? 2) Is llvm-py mature enough in your opinion? If not, what are the problems?

    Read the article

  • Recommended Clang command line options

    - by frou
    The Manual for Clang seems to be work in progress, so could you help me formulate the definitive command line options for compiling ANSI-C (AKA C89, C90) with maximum strictness and relevant/helpful warnings? Clang is a compiler front end for the C, C++, and Objective-C programming languages. It uses the Low Level Virtual Machine (LLVM) as its back end. It is still under development. Its goal is to offer a replacement to the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC)

    Read the article

  • iPhone static library Clang/LLVM error: non_lazy_symbol_pointers

    - by Bekenn
    After several hours of experimentation, I've managed to reduce the problem to the following example (C++): extern "C" void foo(); struct test { ~test() { } }; void doTest() { test t; // 1 foo(); // 2 } This is being compiled for iOS devices in XCode 4.2, using the provided Clang compiler (Apple LLVM compiler 3.0) and the iOS 5.0 SDK. The project is configured as a Cocoa Touch Static Library, and "Enable Linking With Shared Libraries" is set to No because I'm building an AIR native extension. The function foo is defined in another external library. (In my actual project, this would be any of the C API functions defined by Adobe for use in AIR native extensions.) When attempting to compile this code, I get back the error: FATAL:incompatible feature used: section type non_lazy_symbol_pointers (must specify "-dynamic" to be used) clang: error: assembler command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) The error goes away if I comment out either of the lines marked 1 or 2 above, or if I change the build setting "Enable Linking With Shared Libraries" to Yes. (However, if I change the build setting, then I get multiple ld warning: unexpected srelocation type 9 warnings when linking the library into the final project, and the application crashes when running on the device.) The build error also goes away if I remove the destructor from test. So: Is this a bug in Clang? Am I missing some all-important and undocumented build setting? The interaction between an externally-provided function and a struct with a destructor is very peculiar, to say the least.

    Read the article

  • LLVM JIT segfaults. What am I doing wrong?

    - by bugspy.net
    It is probably something basic because I am just starting to learn LLVM.. The following creates a factorial function and tries to git and execute it (I know the generated func is correct because I was able to static compile and execute it). But I get segmentation fault upon execution of the function (in EE-runFunction(TheF, Args)) #include <iostream> #include "llvm/Module.h" #include "llvm/Function.h" #include "llvm/PassManager.h" #include "llvm/CallingConv.h" #include "llvm/Analysis/Verifier.h" #include "llvm/Assembly/PrintModulePass.h" #include "llvm/Support/IRBuilder.h" #include "llvm/Support/raw_ostream.h" #include "llvm/ExecutionEngine/JIT.h" #include "llvm/ExecutionEngine/GenericValue.h" using namespace llvm; Module* makeLLVMModule() { // Module Construction LLVMContext& ctx = getGlobalContext(); Module* mod = new Module("test", ctx); Constant* c = mod->getOrInsertFunction("fact64", /*ret type*/ IntegerType::get(ctx,64), IntegerType::get(ctx,64), /*varargs terminated with null*/ NULL); Function* fact64 = cast<Function>(c); fact64->setCallingConv(CallingConv::C); /* Arg names */ Function::arg_iterator args = fact64->arg_begin(); Value* x = args++; x->setName("x"); /* Body */ BasicBlock* block = BasicBlock::Create(ctx, "entry", fact64); BasicBlock* xLessThan2Block= BasicBlock::Create(ctx, "xlst2_block", fact64); BasicBlock* elseBlock = BasicBlock::Create(ctx, "else_block", fact64); IRBuilder<> builder(block); Value *One = ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt64Ty(ctx), 1); Value *Two = ConstantInt::get(Type::getInt64Ty(ctx), 2); Value* xLessThan2 = builder.CreateICmpULT(x, Two, "tmp"); //builder.CreateCondBr(xLessThan2, xLessThan2Block, cond_false_2); builder.CreateCondBr(xLessThan2, xLessThan2Block, elseBlock); /* Recursion */ builder.SetInsertPoint(elseBlock); Value* xMinus1 = builder.CreateSub(x, One, "tmp"); std::vector<Value*> args1; args1.push_back(xMinus1); Value* recur_1 = builder.CreateCall(fact64, args1.begin(), args1.end(), "tmp"); Value* retVal = builder.CreateBinOp(Instruction::Mul, x, recur_1, "tmp"); builder.CreateRet(retVal); /* x<2 */ builder.SetInsertPoint(xLessThan2Block); builder.CreateRet(One); return mod; } int main(int argc, char**argv) { long long x; if(argc > 1) x = atol(argv[1]); else x = 4; Module* Mod = makeLLVMModule(); verifyModule(*Mod, PrintMessageAction); PassManager PM; PM.add(createPrintModulePass(&outs())); PM.run(*Mod); // Now we going to create JIT ExecutionEngine *EE = EngineBuilder(Mod).create(); // Call the function with argument x: std::vector<GenericValue> Args(1); Args[0].IntVal = APInt(64, x); Function* TheF = cast<Function>(Mod->getFunction("fact64")) ; /* The following CRASHES.. */ GenericValue GV = EE->runFunction(TheF, Args); outs() << "Result: " << GV.IntVal << "\n"; delete Mod; return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Recompile a x86 code with LLVM to some faster one x86

    - by osgx
    Hello Is it possible to run LLVM compiler with input of x86 32bit code? There is a huge algorithm which I have no source code and I want to make it run faster on the same hardware. Can I translate it from x86 back to x86 with optimizations. This Code runs a long time, so I want to do static recompilation of it. Also, I can do a runtime profile of it and give to LLVM hints, which branches are more probable. The original Code is written for x86, and uses no SSE/MMX/SSE2. After recompilation It has a chances to use x86_64 and/or SSE3. Also, The code will be regenerated in more optimal way to hardware decoder. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • clang parser pass example

    - by anon
    Hi! Can anyone paste sample code for a clang extra preprocessor pass where it: takes every variable named "foo", and renames it "bar", thus making the following code legal: int main() { int foo; bar = 5; } ? Thanks! [Aside: what I'm trying to do is write my own macro system for clang. Doing the above will let me inject at the right level to do my rewrites.] Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Functional languages targeting the LLVM

    - by Matthew
    Are there any languages that target the LLVM that: Are statically typed Use type inference Are functional (i.e. lambda expressions, closures, list primitives, list comprehensions, etc.) Have first class object-oriented features (inheritance, polymorphism, mixins, etc.) Have a sophisticated type system (generics, covariance and contravariance, etc.) Scala is all of these, but only targets the JVM. F# (and to some extent C#) is most if not all of these, but only targets .NET. What similar language targets the LLVM?

    Read the article

  • llvm clang struct creating functions on the fly

    - by anon
    I'm using LLVM-clang on Linux. Suppose in foo.cpp I have: struct Foo { int x, y; }; How can I create a function "magic" such that: typedef (Foo) SomeFunc(Foo a, Foo b); SomeFunc func = magic("struct Foo { int x, y; };"); so that: func(SomeFunc a, SomeFunc b); // returns a.x + b.y; ? Note: So basically, "magic" needs to take a char*, have LLVM parse it to get how C++ lays out the struct, then create a function on the fly that returns a.x + b.y; Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Static source code analysis with LLVM

    - by Phong
    I recently discover the LLVM (low level virtual machine) project, and from what I have heard It can be used to performed static analysis on a source code. I would like to know if it is possible to extract the different function call through function pointer (find the caller function and the callee function) in a program. I could find the kind of information in the website so it would be really helpful if you could tell me if such an library already exist in LLVM or can you point me to the good direction on how to build it myself (existing source code, reference, tutorial, example...). EDIT: With my analysis I actually want to extract caller/callee function call. In the case of a function pointer, I would like to return a set of possible callee. both caller and callee must be define in the source code (this does not include third party function in a library).

    Read the article

  • LLVM Clang 5.0 explicit in copy-initialization error

    - by kevzettler
    I'm trying to compile an open source project on OSX that has only been tested on Linux. $: g++ -v Configured with: --prefix=/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/usr --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/4.2.1 Apple LLVM version 5.0 (clang-500.2.79) (based on LLVM 3.3svn) Target: x86_64-apple-da I'm trying to compile with the following command line options g++ -MMD -Wall -std=c++0x -stdlib=libc++ -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-unused-variable -ftemplate-depth=1024 -I /usr/local/Cellar/boost/1.55.0/include/boost/ -g -O3 -c level.cpp -o obj-opt/level.o I am seeing several errors that look like this: ./square.h:39:70: error: chosen constructor is explicit in copy-initialization int strength = 0, double flamability = 0, map<SquareType, int> constructions = {}, bool ticking = false); The project states the following are requirements for the Linux setup. How can I confirm I'm making that? gcc-4.8.2 git libboost 1.5+ with libboost-serialize libsfml-dev 2+ (Ubuntu ppa that contains libsfml 2: ) freeglut-dev libglew-dev

    Read the article

  • Loading LLVM passes on Cygwin

    - by user666730
    I am trying to write an LLVM pass on Windows using Cygwin. When I make the project, a dll gets created in the Release/bin directory instead of a .so file in the Release/lib directory. The latter is what is shown in the LLVM document. When I try to load this dll using the -load flag, nothing happens. $opt -load ../../../Release/bin/Pass.dll -help The pass that I am trying to load isn't printed after this. How do I get this right?

    Read the article

  • Clang LLVM doesn't generate warnings in Xcode

    - by John Gallagher
    I want lots of lovely warnings when compiling. I've set my build configuration to be based on a build config file I have. When I switch to GCC 4.0, it generates all the required warnings. As soon as I change to the Clang LLVM compiler, all the warnings disappear. Every other setting is identical. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • c++ g++ llvm-clang compiler profiling

    - by anon
    Note, my question is not: how do I tell my compiler to compile with profiling on. I want to profile my compiles process. For each file, I'd like to know how much time is spent on each line of the program. I'm working on a project, some files have huge compile times, I'm trying to figure out why. Is there anyway to do this with g++ or llvm-clang? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • llvm preprocessor g++ passes

    - by anon
    Suppose I want to write my own preprocessor. So I want something like this: all *.cpp and *.hpp (even the included ones), before they go to g++, they go: file --> my preprocessor -> g++ Is there a easy way to do this in the LLVM framework? i.e. to add in a stage that says: "after you load up the source file, pipe it through this program before compling it" ? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • CLang error (objective C): value stored during initialization is never read

    - by Scott Pendleton
    Foo *oFoo = [[[Foo alloc] init] autorelease]; This is how I was taught to program in Objective C, yet the CLang error checker complains that the initial value was never read. But oFoo is an object with properties. oFoo itself has no single value. The property values are what matter. oFoo.PropertyA = 1; oFoo.PropertyB = @"Hello, World." Should I just ignore this? Is this worth fixing? What is the fix, seeing that "initial value" is meaningless in my context?

    Read the article

  • llvm's getelementptr instruction with array types

    - by vava
    I'm trying to use array type in llvm and can't get a hold of it yet. As far as I can understand from documentation, array should grow all by itself. But how does it happen, should I just getelementptr with whatever index I have and it'll grow so that index will still be in bounds? That's not what happens, I get all sorts of funny problems which hide away the moment I create array big enough to accommodate all my data. So, should the following code work by itself or I have to call something else for array to increase it's size? %stack = alloca [0 x i32] ; <[0 x i32]*> %"stack[idx]" = getelementptr [0 x i32]* %stack, i32 0, i32 1 ; <i32*>

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  | Next Page >