[PATCH] D58704: Initial (incomplete) implementation of JITLink - A replacement for RuntimeDyld.

[Lang Hames via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

lhames added a comment.

In D58704#1415373 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58704#1415373>, @reames wrote:

> My main concern with this design is how you plan to integrate this with the existing infrastructure.  Are you planning on laying this under RuntimeDyLD?  Or somehow factoring out common implementation to be used by both?  I'm generally bothered by the seeming duplication of such a fragile piece of infrastructure.


JITLink should be more-or-less a drop-in replacement for RuntimeDyld, with a few minor API changes. My intention is to substitute it for MachO handling, first in ORC (where switching out the JIT linker is easy) and then potentially in MCJIT with something like:

  if (isa<MachOObjectFile>(Obj))
    jitLink(Obj)
  else
    Dyld.loadObject(Obj);

The duplication should only be until we are confident in it. If/when JITLink has proved itself a viable replacement we should deprecate and then remove RuntimeDyldMachO. Ideally we will do the same for RuntimeDyldCOFF and RuntimeDyldELF too.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D58704/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D58704