[LLVMdev] Control Flow and Locks when JITing Functions

Evan Jones ejones at uwaterloo.ca
Thu Apr 21 07:24:14 PDT 2005

I just located a concurrency error in my LLVM patch to add locks to the
JIT. I did not add any locks to the JITResolver class in JITEmitter.cpp,
which clearly is a problem since This particular issue causes an
assertion failure on occasion when running a task that spawns threads on
a parallel machine. Any recommendations about if I am doing something
that seems horribly wrong are welcome. I'll update my patch that has
been sitting in Bugzilla for a while as soon as I come up with a good

My understanding of how code is JITed:

1. The program calls a stub.
2. The stub does some magic to call into the JIT and pass the stub
address as a parameter.
3. Eventually, it ends up in JITResolver::JITCompilerFn which looks up
the function.
4. This ends up calling into the JIT eventually.

>From what I understand, the JIT *never* calls into the JITResolver.
However, the JITResolver calls into the JIT. Hence, it is okay to have
two lock objects, one for the JIT and one for the JITResolver. However,
these two classes work very closely together, so I think there should
only be a single lock object. Does this seem reasonable?

Additionally, it only seems to make sense that there is a single
JITResolver instance. Thus, I am going to force code to hold the lock
before calling "getJITResolver." Does that seem reasonable?


Evan Jones


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list