* LLVM as a gcc plugin?
@ 2009-06-04 6:30 Uros Bizjak
2009-06-04 6:39 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 7:36 ` Duncan Sands
0 siblings, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Uros Bizjak @ 2009-06-04 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development
Hello!
Some time ago, there was a discussion about integrating LLVM and GCC
[1]. However, with plugin infrastructure in place, could LLVM be
plugged into GCC as an additional optimization plugin?
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-11/msg00888.html
Uros.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 6:30 LLVM as a gcc plugin? Uros Bizjak
@ 2009-06-04 6:39 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 6:59 ` Miles Bader
2009-06-04 10:14 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 7:36 ` Duncan Sands
1 sibling, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Chris Lattner @ 2009-06-04 6:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uros Bizjak; +Cc: GCC Development
On Jun 3, 2009, at 11:30 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Some time ago, there was a discussion about integrating LLVM and GCC
> [1]. However, with plugin infrastructure in place, could LLVM be
> plugged into GCC as an additional optimization plugin?
>
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-11/msg00888.html
Hi Uros,
I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I think
the plugin interfaces would need small extensions, but there are no
specific technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has
certainly progressed a lot since that (really old) email went out :)
-Chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 6:39 ` Chris Lattner
@ 2009-06-04 6:59 ` Miles Bader
2009-06-04 16:06 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 10:14 ` Rafael Espindola
1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Miles Bader @ 2009-06-04 6:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
Chris Lattner <clattner@apple.com> writes:
>> Some time ago, there was a discussion about integrating LLVM and GCC
>> [1]. However, with plugin infrastructure in place, could LLVM be
>> plugged into GCC as an additional optimization plugin?
>
> I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I think
> the plugin interfaces would need small extensions, but there are no
> specific technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has
> certainly progressed a lot since that (really old) email went out :)
Is there a description somewhere of areas where llvm is thought to do
well compared to gcc, and maybe future plans for improvement?
In the (limited) tests I've done, gcc [4.4, but 4.2 yields similar
results] seems to do a lot better than llvm [2.5], but those were C++
code and I wonder if llvm is currently concentrating on C?
-Miles
--
Quotation, n. The act of repeating erroneously the words of another. The words
erroneously repeated.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 6:30 LLVM as a gcc plugin? Uros Bizjak
2009-06-04 6:39 ` Chris Lattner
@ 2009-06-04 7:36 ` Duncan Sands
1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Duncan Sands @ 2009-06-04 7:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Uros Bizjak; +Cc: GCC Development
Hi,
> Some time ago, there was a discussion about integrating LLVM and GCC
> [1]. However, with plugin infrastructure in place, could LLVM be
> plugged into GCC as an additional optimization plugin?
I plan to start working on an llvm plugin any day now.
Ciao,
Duncan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 6:39 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 6:59 ` Miles Bader
@ 2009-06-04 10:14 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 10:21 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-04 19:25 ` Duncan Sands
1 sibling, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Rafael Espindola @ 2009-06-04 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Lattner; +Cc: Uros Bizjak, GCC Development
> I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I think the
> plugin interfaces would need small extensions, but there are no specific
> technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has certainly
> progressed a lot since that (really old) email went out :)
I can help a bit.
There was some talk about it on #gcc. A plugin should be able to see
all the GCC IL, so it should be able to convert it to LLVM. Keeping
the current llvm-gcc interface would require some hacks
*) The plugin will have to call exit to keep gcc's code generation from running.
*) It will have to remove and recreate the .s file that is being
output. Not sure if this will work.
*) Gcc always produces .o files by calling the assembler, so "-c
-emit-llvm" will not work.
*) The plugis options will be of the form -fplugin-arg-llvm-emit-llvm
One way to avoid these problems is to make llvm-gcc a gcc wrapper that
runs gcc with the llvm plugin, converts command line options and in
the case of -c -emit-llvm calls llvm-as.
Another source of problem will be the early transformations that gcc
does and that are normally disabled in llvm-gcc. The one that I
remember right now is c++ thunk generation.
> -Chris
>
Cheers,
--
Rafael Avila de Espindola
Google | Gordon House | Barrow Street | Dublin 4 | Ireland
Registered in Dublin, Ireland | Registration Number: 368047
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 10:14 ` Rafael Espindola
@ 2009-06-04 10:21 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-04 10:33 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 16:12 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 19:25 ` Duncan Sands
1 sibling, 2 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Steven Bosscher @ 2009-06-04 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael Espindola; +Cc: Chris Lattner, Uros Bizjak, GCC Development
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Rafael Espindola <espindola@google.com> wrote:
>> I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I think the
>> plugin interfaces would need small extensions, but there are no specific
>> technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has certainly
>> progressed a lot since that (really old) email went out :)
>
> I can help a bit.
Excuse me if this is a stupid question, but eh -- why would you want
to make an LLVM plugin? Aren't LLVM and GCC doing just fine as
competing compilers?
Ciao!
Steven
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 10:21 ` Steven Bosscher
@ 2009-06-04 10:33 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 16:12 ` Chris Lattner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Rafael Espindola @ 2009-06-04 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Bosscher; +Cc: Chris Lattner, Uros Bizjak, GCC Development
> Excuse me if this is a stupid question, but eh -- why would you want
> to make an LLVM plugin? Aren't LLVM and GCC doing just fine as
> competing compilers?
LLVM is a toolkit. There is a patched version of GCC that uses LLVM
(llvm-gcc). This is particularly important for fortran and ada since
clang supports only c like languages.
The hope is that a plugin will be easier to maintain than llvm-gcc.
> Ciao!
> Steven
>
Cheers,
--
Rafael Avila de Espindola
Google | Gordon House | Barrow Street | Dublin 4 | Ireland
Registered in Dublin, Ireland | Registration Number: 368047
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 6:59 ` Miles Bader
@ 2009-06-04 16:06 ` Chris Lattner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Chris Lattner @ 2009-06-04 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Miles Bader; +Cc: gcc
On Jun 3, 2009, at 11:59 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
> Chris Lattner <clattner@apple.com> writes:
>>> Some time ago, there was a discussion about integrating LLVM and GCC
>>> [1]. However, with plugin infrastructure in place, could LLVM be
>>> plugged into GCC as an additional optimization plugin?
>>
>> I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I think
>> the plugin interfaces would need small extensions, but there are no
>> specific technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has
>> certainly progressed a lot since that (really old) email went out :)
>
> Is there a description somewhere of areas where llvm is thought to do
> well compared to gcc, and maybe future plans for improvement?
>
> In the (limited) tests I've done, gcc [4.4, but 4.2 yields similar
> results] seems to do a lot better than llvm [2.5], but those were C++
> code and I wonder if llvm is currently concentrating on C?
LLVM has many capabilities and advantages that GCC doesn't (and is
also missing some features and capabilities that GCC has), but it is
also common to misconfigure it so that it isn't optimizing like it
should. It is pretty off topic for this list though, please ask on
the llvmdev mailing list for more information. Please send
information about how you built llvm and what your machine
configuration is,
Thanks,
-Chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 10:21 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-04 10:33 ` Rafael Espindola
@ 2009-06-04 16:12 ` Chris Lattner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Chris Lattner @ 2009-06-04 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Bosscher; +Cc: Rafael Espindola, Uros Bizjak, GCC Development
On Jun 4, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Rafael Espindola <espindola@google.com
> > wrote:
>>> I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I
>>> think the
>>> plugin interfaces would need small extensions, but there are no
>>> specific
>>> technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has certainly
>>> progressed a lot since that (really old) email went out :)
>>
>> I can help a bit.
> Aren't LLVM and GCC doing just fine as
> competing compilers?
I'm not sure what you mean, LLVM and GCC are two completely different
things. LLVM is an infrastructure for building compilers, GCC is an
instance of a compiler. Combining LLVM with GCC gives LLVM-GCC
(another instance of a compiler), which adds new capabilities to GCC
that many users find useful. These include things such as cross-
language LTO support (for C, c++, fortran, etc), JIT compilation,
better performance in some scenarios, etc.
> Excuse me if this is a stupid question, but eh -- why would you want
> to make an LLVM plugin?
There are multiple answers to this question. The most obvious one is
that the current version of llvm-gcc is stuck on GCC 4.2, and 4.2
lacks a number of improvements the fortran and ada front-ends and
runtimes. It would be straight-forward to forward port the patches to
gcc mainline, but presumably implementing llvm-gcc in terms of plugins
would result in something that has easier maintenance (this remains to
be seen of course).
-Chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 10:14 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 10:21 ` Steven Bosscher
@ 2009-06-04 19:25 ` Duncan Sands
2009-06-04 20:56 ` Ian Lance Taylor
1 sibling, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Duncan Sands @ 2009-06-04 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael Espindola; +Cc: Chris Lattner, Uros Bizjak, GCC Development
Hi Rafael,
> There was some talk about it on #gcc. A plugin should be able to see
> all the GCC IL, so it should be able to convert it to LLVM. Keeping
> the current llvm-gcc interface would require some hacks
>
> *) The plugin will have to call exit to keep gcc's code generation from running.
this would work when doing unit-at-a-time, but not when doing
function-at-a-time. Does gcc still do function-at-a-time?
> Another source of problem will be the early transformations that gcc
> does and that are normally disabled in llvm-gcc. The one that I
> remember right now is c++ thunk generation.
Good point.
Ciao,
Duncan.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-04 19:25 ` Duncan Sands
@ 2009-06-04 20:56 ` Ian Lance Taylor
0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Ian Lance Taylor @ 2009-06-04 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Duncan Sands
Cc: Rafael Espindola, Chris Lattner, Uros Bizjak, GCC Development
Duncan Sands <baldrick@free.fr> writes:
> this would work when doing unit-at-a-time, but not when doing
> function-at-a-time. Does gcc still do function-at-a-time?
No.
Ian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-08 10:41 ` Steven Bosscher
@ 2009-06-08 13:28 ` Rafael Espindola
0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Rafael Espindola @ 2009-06-08 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Bosscher
Cc: Joe Buck, Chris Lattner, Andrew Nisbet, grigori.fursin, baldrick,
gcc, ubizjak, zbigniew.chamski, ZAKS, Albert.Cohen
> I'd turn that around: There is already a version of LLVM that uses
> GCC. I don't see any way in which the FSF GCC benefits from this. And
> since this list concerns the FSF GCC...
That is not a valid turn around. We know that the existing LLVM can handle
this. We are not sure if the existing plugin infrastructure can.
That also goes to the more general question "should plugin development be
discussed on this list?". One of the main uses of plugins will probably be
adding features that are not of interest to GCC in general.
> Ciao!
> Steven
>
Cheers,
--
Rafael Avila de Espindola
Google | Gordon House | Barrow Street | Dublin 4 | Ireland
Registered in Dublin, Ireland | Registration Number: 368047
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-08 1:10 ` Rafael Espindola
@ 2009-06-08 10:41 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-08 13:28 ` Rafael Espindola
0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Steven Bosscher @ 2009-06-08 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael Espindola
Cc: Joe Buck, Chris Lattner, Andrew Nisbet, grigori.fursin, baldrick,
gcc, ubizjak, zbigniew.chamski, ZAKS, Albert.Cohen
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 3:10 AM, Rafael Espindola<espindola@google.com> wrote:
>> GMP and MPFR are required components of GCC, and every developer has to
>> deal with them. For interfacing between GCC and LLVM, the experts who'll
>> be able to answer the questions are generally going to be found on the
>> LLVM lists, not the gcc list, and those (like you) who participate on
>> both lists, well, you're on both lists.
>
> That is not the case here. There is already a version of gcc that uses
> llvm.
I'd turn that around: There is already a version of LLVM that uses
GCC. I don't see any way in which the FSF GCC benefits from this. And
since this list concerns the FSF GCC...
Ciao!
Steven
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-05 21:06 ` Joe Buck
@ 2009-06-08 1:10 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-08 10:41 ` Steven Bosscher
0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Rafael Espindola @ 2009-06-08 1:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Buck
Cc: Chris Lattner, Steven Bosscher, Andrew Nisbet, grigori.fursin,
baldrick, gcc, ubizjak, zbigniew.chamski, ZAKS, Albert.Cohen
> GMP and MPFR are required components of GCC, and every developer has to
> deal with them. For interfacing between GCC and LLVM, the experts who'll
> be able to answer the questions are generally going to be found on the
> LLVM lists, not the gcc list, and those (like you) who participate on
> both lists, well, you're on both lists.
That is not the case here. There is already a version of gcc that uses
llvm. What
we are trying to find is if the GCC plugin infrastructure is generic
enough to support similar
use cases. In a previous mail I raised some issues in GCC that illustrate this.
> So as a practical matter, it seems that LLVM lists are more suitable.
> If it's ever decided that LLVM becomes a required piece of GCC, like
> GMP and MPFR, that would change.
Cheers,
--
Rafael Avila de Espindola
Google | Gordon House | Barrow Street | Dublin 4 | Ireland
Registered in Dublin, Ireland | Registration Number: 368047
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-05 16:49 ` Chris Lattner
@ 2009-06-05 21:06 ` Joe Buck
2009-06-08 1:10 ` Rafael Espindola
0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Joe Buck @ 2009-06-05 21:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Lattner
Cc: Steven Bosscher, Andrew Nisbet, grigori.fursin, baldrick, gcc,
ubizjak, zbigniew.chamski, espindola, ZAKS, Albert.Cohen
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Andrew Nisbet<A.Nisbet@mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >> I am interested in developing LLVM functionality to support the
> >> interfaces in GCC ICI.
On Jun 5, 2009, at 3:43 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> > GCC != LLVM. And this is a GCC list. Can LLVM topics please be
> > discussed on an LLVM mailing list?
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 09:48:52AM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote:
> How is LLVM any different than another external imported library (like
> GMP or MPFR) in this context?
GMP and MPFR are required components of GCC, and every developer has to
deal with them. For interfacing between GCC and LLVM, the experts who'll
be able to answer the questions are generally going to be found on the
LLVM lists, not the gcc list, and those (like you) who participate on
both lists, well, you're on both lists.
So as a practical matter, it seems that LLVM lists are more suitable.
If it's ever decided that LLVM becomes a required piece of GCC, like
GMP and MPFR, that would change.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-05 10:43 ` Steven Bosscher
@ 2009-06-05 16:49 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-05 21:06 ` Joe Buck
0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Chris Lattner @ 2009-06-05 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Bosscher
Cc: Andrew Nisbet, grigori.fursin, baldrick, gcc, ubizjak,
zbigniew.chamski, espindola, ZAKS, Albert.Cohen
On Jun 5, 2009, at 3:43 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Andrew Nisbet<A.Nisbet@mmu.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I am interested in developing LLVM functionality to support the
>> interfaces in GCC ICI.
>
> *sigh*
>
> GCC != LLVM. And this is a GCC list. Can LLVM topics please be
> discussed on an LLVM mailing list?
How is LLVM any different than another external imported library (like
GMP or MPFR) in this context?
-Chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
2009-06-05 10:41 Andrew Nisbet
@ 2009-06-05 10:43 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-05 16:49 ` Chris Lattner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Steven Bosscher @ 2009-06-05 10:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Nisbet
Cc: clattner, grigori.fursin, baldrick, gcc, ubizjak,
zbigniew.chamski, espindola, ZAKS, Albert.Cohen
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Andrew Nisbet<A.Nisbet@mmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hello,
> I am interested in developing LLVM functionality to support the interfaces in GCC ICI.
*sigh*
GCC != LLVM. And this is a GCC list. Can LLVM topics please be
discussed on an LLVM mailing list?
Ciao!
Steven
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
@ 2009-06-05 10:41 Andrew Nisbet
2009-06-05 10:43 ` Steven Bosscher
0 siblings, 1 reply; 19+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Nisbet @ 2009-06-05 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: clattner, grigori.fursin
Cc: baldrick, gcc, ubizjak, zbigniew.chamski, espindola, ZAKS,
Albert.Cohen, A.Nisbet
Hello,
I am interested in developing LLVM functionality to support the interfaces in GCC ICI. I
plan to spend some time to investigate feasibility in a couple of weeks time once all exam
boards are finished. My initial goal would be to enable LLVM to be used for iterative
compilation using the HiPEAC ICI framework, either as a drop in replacement for GCC, or as
a plugin. I'd welcome focussed discussion and collaboration with this goal in mind.
My previous work in LLVM was in trying to develop a backend for a soft-core processor
written in HandelC. I am also interested in developing/extending teaching resources to
support compiler based undergraduate/postgraduate courses and projects. One of my long
term research goals is to investigate (implement) iterative feedback directed compilation
and design space exploration tools/techniques for hybrid multicore processor architectures
comprised of hard and reconfigurable logic.
Thanks,
Andy
Dr. Andy Nisbet: URL http://www.docm.mmu.ac.uk/STAFF/A.Nisbet
Department of Computing and Mathematics, John Dalton Building, Manchester
Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, UK.
Email: A.Nisbet@mmu.ac.uk, Phone:(+44)-161-247-1556; Fax:(+44)-161-247-6840.
"Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you
should read the Manchester Metropolitan University's email
disclaimer available on its website
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer "
Dr. Andy Nisbet: URL http://www.docm.mmu.ac.uk/STAFF/A.Nisbet
Department of Computing and Mathematics, John Dalton Building, Manchester
Metropolitan University, Chester Street, Manchester M1 5GD, UK.
Email: A.Nisbet@mmu.ac.uk, Phone:(+44)-161-247-1556; Fax:(+44)-161-247-6840.
"Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you
should read the Manchester Metropolitan University's email
disclaimer available on its website
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer "
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
* Re: LLVM as a gcc plugin?
@ 2009-06-05 9:55 Grigori Fursin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 19+ messages in thread
From: Grigori Fursin @ 2009-06-05 9:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: clattner
Cc: ubizjak, gcc, Zbigniew Chamski, Andy Nisbet, baldrick, espindola,
Albert.Cohen, Ayal Zaks
Hi guys,
Just saw this discussion so wanted to mention that we at HiPEAC are now interested
to use both GCC as static compiler and LLVM as run-time infrastructure for research
and several colleagues wanted to port ICI framework (the recent release is based
on the "official" gcc plugin branch) to LLVM. We want to have both official
gcc plugins and ICI addition on top of it since we have a relatively large community
already around those tools and ICI plugins, and additional tools for automatic program
optimization.
I will unlikely be involved in that now because I just don't have time so I CCed
this email to Andy Nisbet who has been interested to provide plugin system for LLVM,
Zbigniew Chamski who supports ICI for GCC and also Albert Cohen and Ayal Zaks
who are also coordinating those activities within HiPEAC.
The idea is to make GCC and LLVM more attractive to the researchers (i.e. that it's
easy to use compilers without knowing internals much) so that research ideas could
go back to the compilers much faster improving GCC and LLVM ...
Cheers,
Grigori
> On Jun 3, 2009, at 11:30 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> Some time ago, there was a discussion about integrating LLVM and GCC
> [1]. However, with plugin infrastructure in place, could LLVM be
> plugged into GCC as an additional optimization plugin?
>
>
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-11/msg00888.html
>
>
> Hi Uros,
>
> I'd love to see this, but I can't contribute to it directly. I think the plugin interfaces would
need small
> extensions, but there are no specific technical issues preventing it from happening. LLVM has
certainly progressed a
> lot since that (really old) email went out :)
>
> -Chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 19+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-06-08 13:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-06-04 6:30 LLVM as a gcc plugin? Uros Bizjak
2009-06-04 6:39 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 6:59 ` Miles Bader
2009-06-04 16:06 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 10:14 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 10:21 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-04 10:33 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-04 16:12 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-04 19:25 ` Duncan Sands
2009-06-04 20:56 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2009-06-04 7:36 ` Duncan Sands
2009-06-05 9:55 Grigori Fursin
2009-06-05 10:41 Andrew Nisbet
2009-06-05 10:43 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-05 16:49 ` Chris Lattner
2009-06-05 21:06 ` Joe Buck
2009-06-08 1:10 ` Rafael Espindola
2009-06-08 10:41 ` Steven Bosscher
2009-06-08 13:28 ` Rafael Espindola
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).