[llvm-dev] [GPUCC] how to remove _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv() automatically?

[Artem Belevich via llvm-dev]

r267062 removed __nvvm_reflect_anchor() so you should no longer see this
particular manifestation of illegal-character-in-PTX problem.

--Artem

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Artem Belevich <tra at google.com> wrote:

> David's change makes nvvm_reflect_anchor unnecessary. The issue with dots
> in names generated by llvm still needs to be fixed.
> On Apr 9, 2016 8:32 AM, "Jingyue Wu" <jingyue at google.com> wrote:
>
>> Artem,
>>
>> With David's http://reviews.llvm.org/rL265060, do you think
>> __nvvm_reflect_anchor is still necessary?
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, '.' is the direct reason for the ptxas failure here.  I'm curious,
>>> however, about what the purpose of nvvm_reflect_anchorv() is here, and why
>>> does the front-end always generate this function? Since the current PTX
>>> emission doesn't mangle dots, it would be a reasonable workaround for me to
>>> prevent the front-end from generating this function in the first place.
>>> Is there any magic option available to do so?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> yuanfeng
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The actual problem here is that PTX appears to not allow '.' in symbol
>>>> names. We should probably just change our PTX emission to mangle dots
>>>> somehow.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Yuanfeng Peng via llvm-dev <
>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I needed to compile a cuda source file (say, a.cu) into IR (a.bc),
>>>>> and then merge a.bc with another bitcode file (b.bc, compiled from
>>>>> b.cu).  So I used *llvm-link a.bc b.bc -o c.bc*
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I noticed that an internal function '* _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv()
>>>>> *' is defined in both a.bc & b.bc, and when merging these two files,
>>>>> one of the two definitions was renamed to  '
>>>>> *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2()*', and written into c.bc.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Then I did *llc c.bc -o c.s -march=nvptx ; ptxas c.s -o c.o*
>>>>>
>>>>> However, ptxas would give the following complaint:
>>>>>
>>>>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; error   : Duplicate definition of function
>>>>> '_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv'*
>>>>>
>>>>> *ptxas c.s, line 171; fatal   : Parsing error near '.2': syntax error*
>>>>>
>>>>> So I inspected c.s and found the issue above was caused by the
>>>>> following line:
>>>>>
>>>>> .*func**  (.param .b32 func_retval0) _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2()
>>>>> // @_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*
>>>>>
>>>>> After I manually deleted the definition of this function in c.s, the
>>>>> compilation works file.  I wonder how could I force llc to remove  *`*
>>>>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv.2*()`*? Or is that possible to prevent
>>>>> _ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv*() *from being generated into a.bc & b.bc
>>>>> in the first place?  Or is this possible to ask llvm-link to NOT
>>>>> rename *_ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv() **into *
>>>>> *ZL21__nvvm_reflect_anchorv**.2**()*?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> *Yuanfeng Peng *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>


-- 
--Artem Belevich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160421/d8faceaf/attachment.html>