[LLVMdev] X86-64 target

Jeff Cohen jeffc at jolt-lang.org
Fri Jan 20 08:10:55 PST 2006

Please submit the patches to me.  I can't directly use any VS2005 
changes, so I'll have to back port them to VS2003.  There have been 
significant changes to the project files since 1.5.

Morten Ofstad wrote:

> Chris Lattner wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Morten Ofstad wrote:
>>> Hello, I'm currently porting our software to the x86-64 (windows) 
>>> platform. I've already done most of the work involved in getting 
>>> LLVM itself to run on 64-bit windows, but of course that doesn't 
>>> help much as long as the emitted code is 32-bit...
>> My understanding is that LLVM builds fine on AMD64 machines running 
>> Linux, and we'd obviously be happy to merge in changes you made to 
>> make it work well on Win64.
> I have new project files for VS2005 and several patches to the X86 
> target (to get it to compile at all) and to the System/* files for 
> windows. Unfortunately, all this is based on the 1.5 release of LLVM 
> that is used in our software - I'll probably upgrade to the latest 
> release in a few weeks, but I don't want to keep tracking the 
> development version. I don't think it will be too much of a problem, 
> though - as the files I've patch don't seem to change very often. I 
> will submit my patches once I've had time to bring them up to date 
> with the development version.
>>> Since we're using LLVM for dynamic code generation it's not just a 
>>> matter of fixing the compilation problems but also re-targeting the 
>>> x86 backend to use 64 bit pointers everywhere. I'm not familiar with 
>>> the x86-64 instruction set, so I really have no idea how much work 
>>> this will be. My question is really if anyone is already working on 
>>> this, perhaps on a 64-bit Linux?
>> Unfortunately, there is no work (that I'm aware of) to add 64-bit X86 
>> support yet.  The plans I'm aware of to add this will start in 4-5 
>> months. If you were already familiar with the architecture and the 
>> LLVM code generator, I would guess it could be done in 3-4 weeks 
>> without a problem. If not on both counts, it might take a few more 
>> months.
> Ok, I will have to wait then.
> m.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list