diff --git a/Makefile.config.in b/Makefile.config.in
index efa8a0b8746..e2d2c57b4d5 100644
--- a/Makefile.config.in
+++ b/Makefile.config.in
@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ RDYNAMIC := @RDYNAMIC@
#ENABLE_PROFILING = 1
@ENABLE_PROFILING@
-# When DISABLE_ASSERTIONS is enabled, builds of all of the LLVM code will
+# When DISABLE_ASSERTIONS is enabled, builds of all of the LLVM code will
# exclude assertion checks, otherwise they are included.
#DISABLE_ASSERTIONS = 1
@DISABLE_ASSERTIONS@
@@ -297,3 +297,14 @@ endif
# Location of the plugin header file for gold.
BINUTILS_INCDIR := @BINUTILS_INCDIR@
+
+# When ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC is enabled, LLVMC will link libCompilerDriver
+# dynamically. This is needed to make dynamic plugins work on some targets
+# (Windows).
+ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC = 0
+#@ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC@
+
+# When ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC_PLUGINS is enabled, LLVMC will have dynamic plugin
+# support (via the -load option).
+ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC_PLUGINS = 1
+#@ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC_PLUGINS@
diff --git a/Makefile.rules b/Makefile.rules
index a1a1924a990..3ae2db8916d 100644
--- a/Makefile.rules
+++ b/Makefile.rules
@@ -201,15 +201,19 @@ LIBRARYNAME := $(patsubst %,plugin_llvmc_%,$(LLVMC_PLUGIN))
CPP.Flags += -DLLVMC_PLUGIN_NAME=$(LLVMC_PLUGIN)
REQUIRES_EH := 1
+ifeq ($(ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC),1)
+ LD.Flags += -lCompilerDriver
+endif
+
# Build a dynamic library if the user runs `make` directly from the plugin
# directory.
ifndef LLVMC_BUILTIN_PLUGIN
-LOADABLE_MODULE = 1
+ LOADABLE_MODULE = 1
endif
# TableGen stuff...
ifneq ($(BUILT_SOURCES),)
-LLVMC_BUILD_AUTOGENERATED_INC=1
+ LLVMC_BUILD_AUTOGENERATED_INC=1
endif
endif # LLVMC_PLUGIN
@@ -217,10 +221,16 @@ endif # LLVMC_PLUGIN
ifdef LLVMC_BASED_DRIVER
TOOLNAME = $(LLVMC_BASED_DRIVER)
-LLVMLIBS = CompilerDriver.a
-LINK_COMPONENTS = support system
+
REQUIRES_EH := 1
+ifeq ($(ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC),1)
+ LD.Flags += -lCompilerDriver
+else
+ LLVMLIBS = CompilerDriver.a
+ LINK_COMPONENTS = support system
+endif
+
# Preprocessor magic that generates references to static variables in built-in
# plugins.
ifneq ($(LLVMC_BUILTIN_PLUGINS),)
@@ -502,8 +512,7 @@ ifeq ($(OS),Darwin)
else
ifeq ($(OS),Cygwin)
SharedLinkOptions=-shared -nostdlib -Wl,--export-all-symbols \
- -Wl,--enable-auto-import -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base \
- -Wl,--enable-runtime-pseudo-relocs
+ -Wl,--enable-auto-import -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base
else
SharedLinkOptions=-shared
endif
diff --git a/autoconf/configure.ac b/autoconf/configure.ac
index f71e648d571..6b3c4caac0c 100644
--- a/autoconf/configure.ac
+++ b/autoconf/configure.ac
@@ -240,7 +240,7 @@ case "$llvm_cv_target_arch" in
x86_64) LLVM_NATIVE_ARCH="X86" ;;
*) LLVM_NATIVE_ARCH="$llvm_cv_target_arch" ;;
esac
-
+
dnl Define a substitution, ARCH, for the target architecture
AC_SUBST(ARCH,$llvm_cv_target_arch)
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ for a_target in $TARGETS_TO_BUILD; do
fi
done
-# Build the LLVM_TARGET and LLVM_ASM_PRINTER macro uses for
+# Build the LLVM_TARGET and LLVM_ASM_PRINTER macro uses for
# Targets.def and AsmPrinters.def.
LLVM_ENUM_TARGETS=""
LLVM_ENUM_ASM_PRINTERS=""
@@ -593,6 +593,35 @@ case "$enableval" in
*) AC_MSG_ERROR([Invalid setting for --enable-libffi. Use "yes" or "no"]) ;;
esac
+dnl Only Windows needs dynamic libCompilerDriver to support plugins.
+if test "$llvm_cv_os_type" = "Win32" ; then
+ llvmc_dynamic="yes"
+else
+ llvmc_dynamic="no"
+fi
+
+dnl --enable-llvmc-dynamic : should LLVMC link libCompilerDriver dynamically?
+AC_ARG_ENABLE(llvmc-dynamic,AS_HELP_STRING(
+--enable-llvmc-dynamic,
+[Link LLVMC dynamically (default is NO, unless on Win32)]),,
+enableval=$llvmc_dynamic)
+if test ${enableval} = "yes" && test "$ENABLE_PIC" -eq 1 ; then
+ AC_SUBST(ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC,[[ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC=1]])
+else
+ AC_SUBST(ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC,[[]])
+fi
+
+dnl --enable-llvmc-dynamic-plugins : should LLVMC support dynamic plugins?
+AC_ARG_ENABLE(llvmc-dynamic-plugins,AS_HELP_STRING(
+--enable-llvmc-dynamic-plugins,
+[Enable dynamic LLVMC plugins (default is YES)]),,
+enableval=yes)
+if test ${enableval} = "yes" ; then
+ AC_SUBST(ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC_PLUGINS,[[ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC_PLUGINS=1]])
+else
+ AC_SUBST(ENABLE_LLVMC_DYNAMIC_PLUGINS,[[]])
+fi
+
dnl===-----------------------------------------------------------------------===
dnl===
dnl=== SECTION 4: Check for programs we need and that they are the right version
@@ -914,7 +943,8 @@ AC_CHECK_FUNCS([backtrace ceilf floorf roundf rintf nearbyintf getcwd ])
AC_CHECK_FUNCS([powf fmodf strtof round ])
AC_CHECK_FUNCS([getpagesize getrusage getrlimit setrlimit gettimeofday ])
AC_CHECK_FUNCS([isatty mkdtemp mkstemp ])
-AC_CHECK_FUNCS([mktemp realpath sbrk setrlimit strdup strerror strerror_r ])
+AC_CHECK_FUNCS([mktemp realpath sbrk setrlimit strdup ])
+AC_CHECK_FUNCS([strerror strerror_r strerror_s ])
AC_CHECK_FUNCS([strtoll strtoq sysconf malloc_zone_statistics ])
AC_CHECK_FUNCS([setjmp longjmp sigsetjmp siglongjmp])
AC_C_PRINTF_A
@@ -951,7 +981,7 @@ dnl atomic builtins are required for threading support.
AC_MSG_CHECKING(for GCC atomic builtins)
AC_LINK_IFELSE(
AC_LANG_SOURCE(
- [[int main() {
+ [[int main() {
volatile unsigned long val = 1;
__sync_synchronize();
__sync_val_compare_and_swap(&val, 1, 0);
diff --git a/cmake/config-ix.cmake b/cmake/config-ix.cmake
index 61161ed63bb..731071ef85b 100755
--- a/cmake/config-ix.cmake
+++ b/cmake/config-ix.cmake
@@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ check_include_file(windows.h HAVE_WINDOWS_H)
# library checks
include(CheckLibraryExists)
check_library_exists(pthread pthread_create "" HAVE_LIBPTHREAD)
+check_library_exists(pthread pthread_getspecific "" HAVE_PTHREAD_GETSPECIFIC)
+check_library_exists(pthread pthread_rwlock_init "" HAVE_PTHREAD_RWLOCK_INIT)
check_library_exists(dl dlopen "" HAVE_LIBDL)
# function checks
@@ -64,9 +66,10 @@ check_symbol_exists(mallinfo malloc.h HAVE_MALLINFO)
check_symbol_exists(malloc_zone_statistics malloc/malloc.h
HAVE_MALLOC_ZONE_STATISTICS)
check_symbol_exists(pthread_mutex_lock pthread.h HAVE_PTHREAD_MUTEX_LOCK)
-check_symbol_exists(pthread_rwlock_init pthread.h HAVE_PTHREAD_RWLOCK_INIT)
-check_symbol_exists(pthread_getspecific pthread.h HAVE_PTHREAD_GETSPECIFIC)
check_symbol_exists(strtoll stdlib.h HAVE_STRTOLL)
+check_symbol_exists(strerror string.h HAVE_STRERROR)
+check_symbol_exists(strerror_r string.h HAVE_STRERROR_R)
+check_symbol_exists(strerror_s string.h HAVE_STRERROR_S)
check_symbol_exists(__GLIBC__ stdio.h LLVM_USING_GLIBC)
if( LLVM_USING_GLIBC )
diff --git a/configure b/configure
index a237d673ec0..a38067bc2d0 100755
--- a/configure
+++ b/configure
@@ -31356,9 +31356,119 @@ done
+for ac_func in mktemp realpath sbrk setrlimit strdup
+do
+as_ac_var=`echo "ac_cv_func_$ac_func" | $as_tr_sh`
+{ echo "$as_me:$LINENO: checking for $ac_func" >&5
+echo $ECHO_N "checking for $ac_func... $ECHO_C" >&6; }
+if { as_var=$as_ac_var; eval "test \"\${$as_var+set}\" = set"; }; then
+ echo $ECHO_N "(cached) $ECHO_C" >&6
+else
+ cat >conftest.$ac_ext <<_ACEOF
+/* confdefs.h. */
+_ACEOF
+cat confdefs.h >>conftest.$ac_ext
+cat >>conftest.$ac_ext <<_ACEOF
+/* end confdefs.h. */
+/* Define $ac_func to an innocuous variant, in case
Because C++ doesn't have a standard "foreach" loop (though it can be emulated +with macros and may be coming in C++'0x) we end up writing a lot of loops that +manually iterate from begin to end on a variety of containers or through other +data structures. One common mistake is to write a loop in this style:
+ ++ BasicBlock *BB = ... + for (BasicBlock::iterator I = BB->begin(); I != BB->end(); ++I) + ... use I ... ++
The problem with this construct is that it evaluates "BB->end()" +every time through the loop. Instead of writing the loop like this, we strongly +prefer loops to be written so that they evaluate it once before the loop starts. +A convenient way to do this is like so:
+ ++ BasicBlock *BB = ... + for (BasicBlock::iterator I = BB->begin(), E = BB->end(); I != E; ++I) + ... use I ... ++
The observant may quickly point out that these two loops may have different +semantics: if the container (a basic block in this case) is being mutated, then +"BB->end()" may change its value every time through the loop and the +second loop may not in fact be correct. If you actually do depend on this +behavior, please write the loop in the first form and add a comment indicating +that you did it intentionally.
+ +Why do we prefer the second form (when correct)? Writing the loop in the +first form has two problems: First it may be less efficient than evaluating it +at the start of the loop. In this case, the cost is probably minor: a few extra +loads every time through the loop. However, if the base expression is more +complex, then the cost can rise quickly. I've seen loops where the end +expression was actually something like: "SomeMap[x]->end()" and map +lookups really aren't cheap. By writing it in the second form consistently, you +eliminate the issue entirely and don't even have to think about it.
+ +The second (even bigger) issue is that writing the loop in the first form +hints to the reader that the loop is mutating the container (a fact that a +comment would handily confirm!). If you write the loop in the second form, it +is immediately obvious without even looking at the body of the loop that the +container isn't being modified, which makes it easier to read the code and +understand what it does.
+ +While the second form of the loop is a few extra keystrokes, we do strongly +prefer it.
+ +