[LLVMdev] [Proposal] Adding callback mechanism to Execution Engines

[sumeeth kc]

Yes, MCJIT uses the RTDyldMemoryManager::getSymbolAddress when resolving
symbols. I am using the LinkingMemoryManager::getSymbolAddress to resolve
the symbol.

-Sumeeth


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com> wrote:

> Unless I'm missing something, indeed addGlobalMapping should not work with
> MCJIT.
> MCJIT does not consult EEState.getGlobalAddressMap when resolving symbols.
> Instead it uses RTDyldMemoryManager::getSymbolAddress which checks
> with DynamicLibrary::SearchForAddressOfSymbol, so Andy's suggestion of
> DynamicLibrary::addSymbol is better as it should work with both JIT and
> MCJIT.
>
> Another options is to use the LazyFunctionCreator which is implemented in
> both JIT and MCJIT.
>
> Andy - MCJIT::getPointerToFunction does call EE:addGlobalMapping - however
> EEState.getGlobalAddressMap is not used in MCJIT. Should this call be
> removed?
>
> Yaron
>
>
>
> 2013/11/1 sumeeth kc <sumeethkc at gmail.com>
>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> I used the latest code from trunk. GlobalSymbolTable is being used in
>> MCJIT.
>>
>> I guess it wasn't clear from the proposal that the user program will be
>> modified to indicate that the callback should happen at that point in the
>> code. The objective is to call some of the functions which belong to lli or
>> the ExecutionEngine.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sumeeth
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>wrote:
>>
>>>  Are you using the latest code from trunk?  I didn’t think the latest
>>> code used the address mapping in the ExecutionEngine base class.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Of course, if people are depending on this it might be something that
>>> should be fixed if it isn’t working.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> -Andy****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> *From:* Caldarale, Charles R [mailto:Chuck.Caldarale at unisys.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, November 01, 2013 10:54 AM
>>> *To:* Kaylor, Andrew; sumeeth kc; LLVM Dev
>>> *Subject:* RE: [LLVMdev] [Proposal] Adding callback mechanism to
>>> Execution Engines****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> > *From:* llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [
>>> mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu <llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu>] ****
>>>
>>> > *On Behalf Of *Kaylor, Andrew
>>> > *Subject:* Re: [LLVMdev] [Proposal] Adding callback mechanism to
>>> Execution Engines****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> > If the function is in a statically linked module, you need to do
>>> something to explicitly expose it.  With ****
>>>
>>> > the older JIT engine you can use addGlobalMapping as Yaron suggests,
>>> but I don’t think that will work****
>>>
>>> > with MCJIT.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Seems to work fine for us with MCJIT.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> - Chuck****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131101/c04b69e1/attachment.html>