Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "test1a".
Did you mean:
test1
2007 Aug 22
12
Virtual resource not found
...issing here.
I''m trying to create a network module, used similar to the ''users''
configuration described in the Best Practices document. I have a users
module which has that and it works with similar syntax to below. If I
"unvirtualize" the network_interface for test1a-eth1 under the
network_dmz_virt class, this works.
Please help. Let me know if I need to provide more information. Node
information is set up per the Best Practices, in nodes.pp and
templates.pp respectively. The other manifests are in
modules/network/manifests/(classes|definitions).
test1a:~
$ s...
2009 Jul 24
3
Goto from a feature macro is not working?
...SWG-0085a180' jumping out of macro 'nway-start'
and then the SIP line is hung up, with no further dialplan steps
logged for that line.
Writing a small test case to see what's going on, I get the same
behavior:
; extensions.conf
[macro-test1]
exten => s,1,Goto(macro-test1a,s,1)
[macro-test1a]
exten => s,1,NoOp
; features.conf
macro-test1 => *1,self/both,Macro,test1
When I activeate this feature with *1, I get:
-- Executing [s at macro-test1:1] Goto("SIP/SWG-007f9280","macro-test1a|s|1") in new stack
-- Goto (m...
2013 May 30
1
[LLVMdev] Expected behavior of calling bitcasted functions?
...>
> Pete
Is it really supposed to be undefined? The tests are checking for
specific behavior in these "undefined" cases.
opt -lint < test/Transforms/InstCombine/call.ll
Undefined behavior: Call argument type mismatches callee parameter type
call void bitcast (void (i8*)* @test1a to void (i32*)*)(i32* %A)
Undefined behavior: Call argument type mismatches callee parameter type
call void bitcast (void (i8)* @test2a to void (i32)*)(i32 %A)
Undefined behavior: Call return type mismatches callee return type
%X = call i32 bitcast (i8 ()* @test4a to i32 ()*)()
Undefined be...
2013 May 30
0
[LLVMdev] Expected behavior of calling bitcasted functions?
Hello,
This is an interesting example. Whenever I see strange things like this, I
use opt's -lint.
In this case, opt -lint reports:
Undefined behavior: Call return type mismatches callee return type
%call = call float @alias_f32(float %tmp2) #1
You'll get a similar report when the parameter types mismatch.
Pete
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Arsenault, Matthew <
2013 May 30
3
[LLVMdev] Expected behavior of calling bitcasted functions?
Hi,
I'm not sure what the expected behavior of calling a bitcasted function is. Suppose you have a case like this (which you get on the source level from attribute alias):
@alias_f32 = alias bitcast (i32 (i32)* @func_i32 to float (float)*)
define internal i32 @func_i32(i32 %v) noinline nounwind {
entry:
ret i32 %v
}
define void @bitcast_alias_scalar(float* noalias %source, float* noalias
2014 Nov 03
8
[LLVMdev] [PATCH] Protection against stack-based memory corruption errors using SafeStack
....deep = type { %union.anon }
+%union.anon = type { %struct.anon }
+%struct.anon = type { %struct.anon.0 }
+%struct.anon.0 = type { %union.anon.1 }
+%union.anon.1 = type { [2 x i8] }
+%struct.small = type { i8 }
+
+ at .str = private unnamed_addr constant [4 x i8] c"%s\0A\00", align 1
+
+; test1a: array of [16 x i8]
+; no safestack attribute
+; Requires no protector.
+define void @test1a(i8* %a) nounwind uwtable {
+entry:
+; LINUX-I386: test1a:
+; LINUX-I386-NOT: movl __llvm__unsafe_stack_ptr
+; LINUX-I386: .cfi_endproc
+
+; LINUX-X64: test1a:
+; LINUX-X64-NOT: movq %fs:640
+; LINUX...