[LLVMdev] Using LLVM to serialize object state -- and performance

[Kaylor, Andrew]

OK, I think it's starting to make sense.  You probably don't want to write machine code.  That's why I was confused about pointer continuity.  It wouldn't work with machine code.

It might be worth stepping through the look-up by name in a debugger to see what's happening.  I think it's possible that is slow.

-Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Paul J. Lucas
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 1:51 PM
To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu List
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Using LLVM to serialize object state -- and performance

On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:49 AM, "Kaylor, Andrew" <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote:

> I think you may have gone beyond what I understand in how the legacy JIT code works.  It looks like the call to addGlobalMapping should short-circuit the named function look up that I described ...

Well, I first look for the function by name and, if I didn't find it, then I call addGlobalMapping()

> Are you writing LLVM IR to disk or machine code?

Currently IR.  How can I write machine code?

- Paul


_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev