I've seen several conflicting descriptions of how to do this around the google results, and haven't been able to get any of them to work.
My problem is basically this: where I call ExecutionEngine::getPointerToFunction (with an llvm::Function*), I'd like to instead get the pretty-printed x86 assembly that would be produced for this function.
Anybody?
[ETA: I'm using LLVM 3.3. The descriptions I've found seem to be for earlier versions of LLVM.]
It turns out that you can add an event listener to a JIT ExecutionEngine with ExecutionEngine::RegisterJITEventListener. If you provide an instance of that class, you can have your callback invoked when machine code is generated for you, and you'll be given a pointer to the machine code and its length. With this, you can call llvm::sys::disassembleBuffer to get a description of the machine code buffer.
However, the llvm::sys::disassembleBuffer function just defers to the udis library if LLVM was compiled with that support. Since my build of LLVM didn't have this flag set and I can't rebuild it, I'll just look into using the udis library directly:
https://github.com/vmt/udis86
Related
I have a Swift application that uses a module, and I need to call a global function that is in the application from the module, is this possible?
To perhaps explain a little better, this is a test app structure:
CallbackTestApp contains a function foo(), I would like to call it from Module1 or File, will swift allow this?
edit #1
More details have been requested on what is the background of my issue, hopefully, this will not turn out to be an XY situation.
There's a tool developed by my company that process the application source* code and in some places add function call (ignore the why etc, have to be generic here.). Those function calls are exactly to foo() which then does some magic (btw, no return value and no arguments are allowed), if the application does not use modules or if modules are excluded from the processing then all is fine (Linker does not complain that the function is not defined), if there are modules then nothing works since I did not found a way to inject foo() (yet).
*Not exactly the source code, actually the bitcode is processed, the tool get the source, use llvm toolchain to generate bitcode, do some more magic and then add the call to foo() by generating it's mangled name and adding a swiftcall
Not actually sure those additional details will help.
I was wondering if it's currently possible to have an 'external' (.so/.dylib) LLVM plugin (module) pass scheduled at LTO time? The reason for wanting this is a inter-modular optimization I want to add.
I also found this topic; How to write a custom intermodular pass in LLVM?
But a separate tool is not an option for me.
Thanks
I think the most helpful thing here might be to understand how passes are run and what the state of the code is during LTO.
First of all, when optimization passes are run by the compiler, they are done as a set that has been added to a PassManager. This means that LLVM/Clang, when passed something like -O3 will create a copy of a PassManager and subsequently provide it the set of passes expected to provide O3 level of optimization. This is very different from what you are doing with an external library which must be provided manually and cannot be fit into the pass pipeline normally.
Then we have the state of things when doing LTO. During Link Time Optimization, all of the individual translation units have been consolidated and are now a single Module. This means that an optimization which runs on each function will run on every function in the code base. Similarly, a per-module optimization will run on the full Module and therefor offer Inter-Procedural Analysis/Optimization.
If you're looking to use an Intra-Modular Pass then there is no reason to do this at LTO time and instead you can simply make a ModulePass and run that on each unit.
I have a workspace built using MS-Visual Studio 2005 with all C code.In that i see many functions which are not called but they are still compiled(they are not under any compile time macro to disable them from compiling).
I set following optimization settings for the MS-VS2005 project to remove that unused code:-
Optimization level - /Ox
Enable whole program optimization - /GL
I tried both Favor speed /Ot and Favor Size /Os
Inspite of all these options, when i see the linker generated map file, I see the symbols(unsed functions) names present in the map file.
Am I missing something? I want to completely remove the unused code.
How do I do this?
The compiler compiles C files one-at-a-time. Therefore, while compiling a C-file that does contains an unused function, the compiler cannot be sure that it will not be called from another file and hence it will compile that function too. However, if that function were declared as static (file-scope), then the compiler would know it is not used and hence remove it.
Even with whole program optimization, I think it would still not be done since the compilation could be for a library.
Linkers do something similar to what you are looking for. If your code links against a library containing multiple objects, then any objects that do not contain functions used by your code (directly or indirectly) would not be included in the final executable.
One option would be to separate your code into individual libraries and object files.
PS - This is just my guess. The behavior of the compiler (with whole program optimization) or linker essentially depends on the design choices of that particular compiler or linker
On our projects we have a flag set under the project properties\Linker\Refrences. We set it to Eliminate Unreferenced Data (/OPT:REF), according to the description this is supposed to remove function calls or data that are never used. I am just going by the description, I have never tested this or worked with it. But I just happened to see it within the last hour and figured it might be something you could try.
os i figured out how to use the -mthumb and -mno-thumb compiler flag and more or less understand what it's doing.
But what is the -mthumb-interlinking flag doing? when is it needed, and is it set for the whole project if i set 'compile for thumb' in my project settings?
thanks for the info!
Open a terminal and type man gcc
Do you mean -mthumb-interwork ?
-mthumb-interwork
Generate code which supports calling between the ARM and Thumb
instruction sets. Without this option the two instruction sets
cannot be reliably used inside one program. The default is
-mno-thumb-interwork, since slightly larger code is generated when
-mthumb-interwork is specified.
If this is related to a build configuration, you should be able to set it separately for each configuration "such as Release or Debug".
Why do you want to change these settings? I know using thumb instructions save some memory but will it save enough to matter in this case?
my application uses both, thumb and vfp code but i never specifically
set -thumb-interwork flag.. how is that possible?
According to man page, without that flag the two instructions sets
cannot be reliably used inside one program.
It says "reliably"; so without that option, it seems they still can be mixed within a single program but it might be "unreliably". I think normally mixing both instructions sets works, the compiler is smart enough to figure out when it has to switch from one set to another one. However, there might be border cases the compiler just doesn't understand correctly and it might fail to see that it should switch instruction sets here, causing the application to fail (most likely it will crash). This option generates special code, so that no matter what your code does, the switching always happens correctly and reliably; the downside is that this extra code is needed for every global visible function and thus increases the binary side (I have no idea if it also might slow down function calls a little bit, I personally would expect that).
Please also note the following two settings:
-mcallee-super-interworking
Gives all externally visible functions in the file being
compiled an ARM instruction set header
which switches to Thumb mode before executing the rest of
the function. This allows these
functions to be called from non-interworking code.
-mcaller-super-interworking
Allows calls via function pointers (including virtual
functions) to execute correctly regardless
of whether the target code has been compiled for
interworking or not. There is a small overhead
in the cost of executing a function pointer if this option
is enabled.
Though I think you only need those, when building libraries to be used with other projects; but I don't know for sure. The GCC thumb handling is definitely "underdocumented".
GWT compiles the Java source into Javascript, and names the files according to a hash of their contents. I'm getting a new set of files every compile, because the javascript contents are changing, even when I don't change the source at all.
The files are different for OBF and PRETTY output, but if I set it to DETAILED, they're no longer different every compile. In PRETTY, I can see that all/most of the differences between compiles are in the value parameters for typeId. For example, a funciton called initValues() is called with different values for it's typeId parameter.
In PRETTY mode, the differences you see are allocation of Java Classes to TypeIds. It's how GWT manages run time type checking. You'll notice a table at the bottom of each script essentially mapping each typeId to all compatible superclasses. This is how GWT can still throw ClassCastException in JavaScript (though you should run into this very rarely!).
In OBF mode, the differences are due to the allocation of minified function names.
In both cases, it's due to the order the compiler is processing the code. Some internal symbol tables might be using a non-ordered collection store symbols for processing. It can happen for lots of reasons.
As far as I know, GWT will compile a new version every time you compile it, this is a feature ;)
You can use ant to control it though, so that it only builds the GWT section of your application if it's actually changed:
http://wiki.shiftyjelly.com/index.php/GWT#Use_The_Power_of_Ant_to_Build_Changes_Only