[LLVMdev] ExecutionEngine should have a non-Module creator

[Yaron Keren]

If someone encounters this problem here is my workaround code,

globals:

  llvm::OwningPtr<llvm::ExecutionEngine> m_EE;
  llvm::Module* m_LastModule;


after making module:

  if (!m_EE) {
    m_EE.reset(llvm::EngineBuilder(m_LastModule)
                   .setErrorStr(&Error)
                   .setUseMCJIT(true)
                   .create());
  } else {
    m_EE->addModule(m_LastModule);
  }


Yaron



2013/10/17 Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>

>  I agree that this would be useful.  One minor stumbling block is that
> the EngineBuilder uses the supplied Module to determine the target triple
> when creating the TargetMachine.  Obviously that could be handled with
> different EngineBuilder usage (the API may even already be there for
> that).  It’s just something to consider.****
>
> ** **
>
> -Andy****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Yaron Keren [mailto:yaron.keren at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 17, 2013 12:46 PM
> *To:* <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>; Kaylor, Andrew
> *Subject:* ExecutionEngine should have a non-Module creator****
>
> ** **
>
> With the support of Multi-modules, it makes sense to have a creator /
> constructor for ExecutionEngine that does not require a module.****
>
> ** **
>
> The use-case is a program using one EE created at initialization that
> holds many modules created later, as needed. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Workaround for current API could be****
>
> 1) using a pointer to EE init with NULL, delaying the actual EE
> construction to the time the first module is ready and skipping
> construction with later modules.****
>
> or****
>
> 2) supplying a dummy Module to the creator and then removeModule(M).****
>
> ** **
>
> Yaron****
>
> ** **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131018/6fccc7aa/attachment.html>