-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Restructure JIT to have more extension points and more logical control flow #50650
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pchintalapudi
added
compiler:codegen
Generation of LLVM IR and native code
compiler:llvm
For issues that relate to LLVM
labels
Jul 24, 2023
pchintalapudi
force-pushed
the
pc/restructure-jit
branch
from
July 24, 2023 15:27
30fee95
to
7e19cd9
Compare
vtjnash
reviewed
Jul 25, 2023
PoolIdx = jl_options.opt_level; | ||
} | ||
assert(PoolIdx < N && "Invalid optimization level for compiler!"); | ||
return orc::SimpleCompiler(****TMs[PoolIdx])(M); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
😂 ****[]
vtjnash
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2023
pchintalapudi
force-pushed
the
pc/cleanups2
branch
from
July 25, 2023 23:55
8bf033d
to
cc00c95
Compare
pchintalapudi
force-pushed
the
pc/restructure-jit
branch
from
July 25, 2023 23:56
7e19cd9
to
4274c9b
Compare
pchintalapudi
force-pushed
the
pc/restructure-jit
branch
from
July 26, 2023 17:15
db69179
to
7a67140
Compare
pchintalapudi
added
the
merge me
PR is reviewed. Merge when all tests are passing
label
Jul 26, 2023
:/ |
|
The code here is wrong (missing a compatible alignment attribute with the memcpy):
|
pchintalapudi
removed
the
merge me
PR is reviewed. Merge when all tests are passing
label
Jul 30, 2023
vtjnash
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 1, 2023
We shouldn't merge non-external definitions in `jl_merge_module`, so that we can freely emit internal globals without relying on a global counter. Depends on #50650
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rather than forking the optimize and compile layers into individual layers per optlevel, each optimize and compile layer will switch on the requested optlevel of the module, which reduces the complexity of tracing a module's path through the JIT. In addition, this lets us move some of the
addModule
code to happen post-optimization, which makes the optimization pipeline not see literal pointers except those generated by codegen.