[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Orc Windows C++

Wed Oct 14 00:52:18 PDT 2015

That's great news, thanks! If I can be of any help, let me know. :)
I'll see if I can reduce the example for the relocation issue whilst you're
at it.

Regards,

Joshua

--
Joshua Gerrard
JUCE Software Developer

*ROLI’s **award-winning*
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/luxury/design/31520/the-seaboard-grand-piano-wins-designs-of-the-year-2014-award.html>*
Seaboard
GRAND, celebrated as the “**piano of the future*
<http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/27/tech/innovation/hans-zimmer-seaboard-future-piano/>*”,
is now joined by the **Seaboard RISE*
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGr7VbDiRNw>*, “**every bit as slimline
and attractive as its bigger brother*
<http://www.soundonsound.com/news?NewsID=18726>*”. The press is hailing the
Seaboard RISE as “**innovative*
<http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-09/10/seaboard-rise-digital-keyboard-launch-uk-price>*”,
“**expressive*
<http://createdigitalmusic.com/2015/09/new-roli-instrument-wants-make-expressive-control-mainstream/>*”,
“**accessible*
<http://createdigitalmusic.com/2015/09/new-roli-instrument-wants-make-expressive-control-mainstream/>*”,
and “**a keyboard controller that does to piano keys what 3D touch does to
the iPhone*
<http://www.slashgear.com/roli-seaboard-rise-is-like-3d-touch-for-musicians-11404216/>*”.
Now available for preorder at **www.roli.com* <http://www.roli.com/>*.*

On 14 October 2015 at 06:48, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Joshua, Andy,
>
> I'm afraid I'm not familiar with COFF. Andy - is IMAGE_REL_AMD64_REL32
> unexpected if you're compiling for 64-bit mode? It sounds like it from your
> description above.
>
> I'll look in to the "BSS sections don't have contents" error tomorrow: It
> looks like it's happening in platform-agnostic RuntimeDyld code, so
> hopefully I can reproduce this on Darwin.
>
> Cheers,
> Lang.
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Joshua Gerrard via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Oops, sorry for the spam.
>>
>> That last comment was incorrect. It’s IMAGE_REL_AMD64_REL32 not _5
>>
>> > On 5 Oct 2015, at 17:26, Joshua Gerrard <joshua.gerrard at roli.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Additional info: when the relocation issue does occur the relocation
>> type is IMAGE_REL_AMD64_REL32_5
>> >
>> >> On 5 Oct 2015, at 17:16, Joshua Gerrard <joshua.gerrard at roli.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> It’s pretty intermittent at the moment…sometimes I get the relocation
>> overflow issue, sometimes I get another issue about BSS sections having no
>> contents.
>> >>
>> >> The source code to reproduce either is simple:
>> >>
>> >> #include <iostream>
>> >>
>> >> int main (int argc, char* argv[])
>> >> {
>> >>
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> I’ve managed to reproduce the BSS section issue in clang consistently,
>> and since that comes before terms of where it happens in the compilation /
>> JIT’ing process, I can’t get to the part where I see the relocation issue
>> in clang.exe rather than my own program.
>> >>
>> >> clang.exe -c "Y:\Documents\Visual Studio
>> 2013\Projects\NewProject\Source\main.cpp"
>> >> llvm-rtdyld.exe" -execute main.o
>> -dylib=C:\Windows\System32\msvcr120d.dll
>> >>
>> >> It also occurs with -mcmodel=large specified.
>> >>
>> >> The exact output of the second command, llvm-rtdyld, is as follows...
>> >>
>> >> Assertion failed: (Sec->Characteristics &
>> COFF::IMAGE_SCN_CNT_UNINITIALIZED_DATA) == 0 && "BSS sections don't have
>> contents!", file C:\llvm\llvm\lib\Object\COFFObjectFile.cpp, line 951
>> >> 0x00007FF65EAA574C (0x0000000000000016 0x00007FFC73140648
>> 0x0000007900000008 0x00000079E68EDC40), HandleAbort() + 0xC bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\lib\support\windows\signals.inc, line 296
>> >> 0x00007FFC807B396F (0x00007FF600000016 0x0000000000000000
>> 0x0000007900000004 0x0000000000000101), raise() + 0x35F bytes(s)
>> >> 0x00007FFC807C2060 (0x00000079E68EE3F0 0x0000000000000240
>> 0x00007FFC80888430 0x00007FF65F7BFF80), abort() + 0x40 bytes(s)
>> >> 0x00007FFC807ABF78 (0x00007FF65F7BFF80 0x00007FF65F7BFEF0
>> 0xCCCCCCCC000003B7 0xCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC), _wassert() + 0x108 bytes(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65E9E7F57 (0x00000079E6A4AC40 0x00000079E68EE998
>> 0x00000079E6A317FC 0x00000079E68EE968),
>> llvm::object::COFFObjectFile::getSectionContents() + 0x77 bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\lib\object\coffobject
>> >> file.cpp, line 951 + 0x43 byte(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65E9E46E4 (0x00000079E6A4AC40 0x00000079E68EEE88
>> 0x00000079E6A317FC 0x00000079E68EEC98),
>> llvm::object::COFFObjectFile::getSectionContents() + 0x74 bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\lib\object\coffobject
>> >> file.cpp, line 293
>> >> 0x00007FF65E8B2BC5 (0x00000079E68EEC48 0x00000079E68EEE88
>> 0x00000079E68EEC98 0x00000079E68EEC78),
>> llvm::object::SectionRef::getContents() + 0x55 bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\include\llvm\object\objectfile.h
>> >> , line 375 + 0x2D byte(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65EA1E516 (0x00000079E6A5DEA0 0x00000079E68EEFF0
>> 0x00000079E6A4AC40 0xCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC),
>> llvm::RuntimeDyldImpl::loadObjectImpl() + 0x4D6 bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\lib\executionengine\runtimedyld
>> >> \runtimedyld.cpp, line 186 + 0x25 byte(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65EA431AC (0x00000079E6A5DEA0 0x00000079E68EF708
>> 0x00000079E6A4AC40 0x00000079E68EF0C8), llvm::RuntimeDyldCOFF::loadObject()
>> + 0x3C bytes(s), c:\llvm\llvm\lib\executionengine\runtimedyld\runt
>> >> imedyldcoff.cpp, line 57 + 0x14 byte(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65EA1B411 (0x00000079E68EF338 0x00000079E68EF708
>> 0x00000079E6A4AC40 0xCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC), llvm::RuntimeDyld::loadObject() +
>> 0x221 bytes(s), c:\llvm\llvm\lib\executionengine\runtimedyld\runtime
>> >> dyld.cpp, line 928 + 0x2F byte(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65E6781A9 (0x00007FF65FB9AB70 0x00000079E6A45150
>> 0x00007FF65F177408 0xCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC), executeInput() + 0x419 bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\tools\llvm-rtdyld\llvm-rtdyld.cpp, line 365 + 0x1D byte(
>> >> s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65E67A885 (0x00007FF600000004 0x00000079E6A45150
>> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000), main() + 0xF5 bytes(s),
>> c:\llvm\llvm\tools\llvm-rtdyld\llvm-rtdyld.cpp, line 687 + 0x5 byte(s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65EE518CD (0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000
>> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000), __tmainCRTStartup() + 0x19D
>> bytes(s), f:\dd\vctools\crt\crtw32\dllstuff\crtexe.c, line 626 + 0x19 byte
>> >> (s)
>> >> 0x00007FF65EE519FE (0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000
>> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000), mainCRTStartup() + 0xE bytes(s),
>> f:\dd\vctools\crt\crtw32\dllstuff\crtexe.c, line 466
>> >> 0x00007FFC9C4F2D92 (0x00007FFC9C4F2D70 0x0000000000000000
>> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000), BaseThreadInitThunk() + 0x22
>> bytes(s)
>> >> 0x00007FFC9EE19F64 (0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000
>> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000), RtlUserThreadStart() + 0x34 bytes(s)
>> >>
>> >> …the stack trace of which looks semantically the same as when I have
>> that assertion triggered in my own program.
>> >>
>> >> Relevant information:
>> >> - llvm, clang and compiler-rt revision 249038 from trunk
>> >> - built with the command (where ../llvm is the llvm source root) cmake
>> -G "Visual Studio 12 2013 Win64" -DLLVM_INCLUDE_EXAMPLES=OFF
>> -DLLVM_INCLUDE_TESTS=OFF -DLLVM_INCLUDE_DOCS=OFF -DLLVM_USE_CRT_DEBUG=MDd
>> -DLLVM_USE_CRT_RELEASE=MD ../llvm
>> >> - VS2013 version 12.0.40629.00 Update 5
>> >>
>> >> Running the same code without llvm-rtdyld.exe (i.e. non-JIT) does so
>> without error.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks very much for any response!
>> >>
>> >> (Sorry for the slow reply, was trying to get something as minimal as
>> possible for you to look at)
>> >>
>> >>> On 2 Oct 2015, at 19:45, Andy Ayers <andya at microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> If LLVM is generating the x64 code and you have specified a large
>> code model, you should not see any 32 bit relocations.
>> >>>
>> >>> So it would be interesting to determine what kind of relocation you
>> are seeing and where it came from.
>> >>>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of
>> Joshua Gerrard via llvm-dev
>> >>> Sent: Friday, October 2, 2015 1:18 AM
>> >>> To: Hayden Livingston <halivingston at gmail.com>
>> >>> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> >>> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Orc Windows C++
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for the link!
>> >>> There’s some code there that looks extremely relevant to say the
>> least.
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 1 Oct 2015, at 19:00, Hayden Livingston <halivingston at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Maybe looking at their code might help:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fgithu
>> >>>> b.com
>> %2fdotnet%2fllilc%2fblob%2fdd12743f9cdb5418f1c39b2cd756da1e8396a9
>> >>>>
>> 22%2flib%2fJit%2fLLILCJit.cpp%23L299&data=01%7c01%7candya%40microsoft.
>> >>>>
>> com%7ce71168aad7ca4c98ee1f08d2cb024bf8%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011d
>> >>>> b47%7c1&sdata=4LCM5dPAFSQZYdEV2jNoXbtIg79%2foS5%2bB8O2Nl3ZqT4%3d
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:45 AM, David Blaikie via llvm-dev
>> >>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >>>>> Moving to the LLVM Dev list & cc'ing Lang.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:23 AM, Joshua Gerrard via cfe-dev
>> >>>>> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hello folks,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I’m developing an application that uses Orc JIT for C++, which
>> works
>> >>>>>> swimmingly on Mac OS X. However, the Windows version has been a
>> >>>>>> battle and a half, and it’s now at the point where I need some
>> assistance to progress.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The problem I’m having is “Relocation overflow” (related:
>> >>>>>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fllv
>> >>>>>> m.org
>> %2fbugs%2fshow_bug.cgi%3fid%3d23228%23c8%2c&data=01%7c01%7candy
>> >>>>>> a%40microsoft.com%7ce71168aad7ca4c98ee1f08d2cb024bf8%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=SnxHR5RzKhzNYFDeryATV0MSpqTcjZauHtTG2GTEazA%3d
>> see #8) … so I spoke to some clang developers who focussed on Windows at
>> CppCon last week, and they gave me the following advice:
>> >>>>>> - Use ELF
>> >>>>>> - Using this results in another issue about comdat sections, see
>> here:
>> >>>>>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2froo
>> >>>>>> t.cern.ch
>> %2fphpBB3%2fviewtopic.php%3ft%3d19808&data=01%7c01%7candya%
>> >>>>>> 40microsoft.com
>> %7ce71168aad7ca4c98ee1f08d2cb024bf8%7c72f988bf86f141a
>> >>>>>>
>> f91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=DxCUHFZFW7SxfN6pHlHDfT3yY4DrE5DZTyLCVDWv
>> >>>>>> 3Yw%3d
>> >>>>>> - Stick with COFF, but use the large code model
>> >>>>>> - No observed difference, seems to be the case because JITDefault
>> >>>>>> is being used in the same way as Large, which would make sense
>> >>>>>> - According to the clang developers I spoke to, Lang and Andy
>> >>>>>> might have an interest in fixing this (would seem likely, as
>> they’re
>> >>>>>> the two commenters on the first issue I linked), since it’s better
>> >>>>>> to use COFF on Windows than keep trying to work around it
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Any ideas?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks in advance!
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> >>>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >>>>>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2flist
>> >>>>>> s.llvm.org
>> %2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcfe-dev&data=01%7c01%7ca
>> >>>>>> ndya%40microsoft.com
>> %7ce71168aad7ca4c98ee1f08d2cb024bf8%7c72f988bf86
>> >>>>>>
>> f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=9uOfIMd1%2b2DesS3Bne%2f2jkbDpV5REzk
>> >>>>>> VYj33rujvMGY%3d
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >>>>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2flists
>> >>>>> .llvm.org
>> %2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fllvm-dev&data=01%7c01%7can
>> >>>>> dya%40microsoft.com
>> %7ce71168aad7ca4c98ee1f08d2cb024bf8%7c72f988bf86f1
>> >>>>>
>> 41af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=FZAxWxfyZeisom9maEJGCLgK2aboy%2bnneyka
>> >>>>> 4FPlh%2bE%3d
>> >>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >>>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2flists.llvm.org%2fcgi-bin%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fllvm-dev%0a&data=01%7c01%7candya%40microsoft.com%7ce71168aad7ca4c98ee1f08d2cb024bf8%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=y93xNmwi0v4F3tMocQyu1rGo7zCnU5y3T2FLxSdSWo0%3d
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151014/f5e7f708/attachment.html>