Displaying 10 results from an estimated 10 matches for "22589".
Did you mean:
2589
2015 Feb 17
6
[LLVMdev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
...ssue has also been reported in
> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22058. In the case of the 22%
> performance degradation in SciMark2's Sparse matmult benchmark, I have
> identified both commits that contribute equally to this regression in
> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22589...
Thank you very much for trying out the release candidate.
I asked a few of the other developers, and the consensus was that
while unfortunate, we won't block the release on a perf regression
like this, at least not at this stage in the release process.
Having said that, we will be doing a...
2011 Feb 16
1
BIND 9.7.3 -- TCP DoS in SO_ACCEPTFILTER
The release notes for BIND 9.7.3 contain this:
* A bug in NetBSD and FreeBSD kernels with SO_ACCEPTFILTER enabled
allows for a TCP DoS attack. Until there is a kernel fix, ISC is
disabling SO_ACCEPTFILTER support in BIND. [RT #22589]
The CHANGES file also says:
2996. [security] Temporarily disable SO_ACCEPTFILTER support.
[RT #22589]
Can anyone tell me more? What releases are affected? Is a kernel patch in the works?
Thanks in advance,
Eric
2015 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
I finally got around to testing this on a Bloomfield processor (Early
2009 MacPro 2x2.66 GHz dual-quad core) and the regressions from
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22589 are even more severe. For
10 runs of scimark2_1c built with "-O3 -march=native"...
llvm 3.5.1 1204.16+/-2.66 Mflops
3.6 branch 866.49+/-1.26 Mflops
Do you seriously want to ship with a 39% performance regression in a
major benchmark?
Jack
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:33...
2015 Feb 18
5
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
On 02/18/2015 03:01 PM, Renato Golin wrote:
> So it seems that you're one of the very few people that doesn't use
> ToT. Almost everyone else uses it and the progress of LLVM kind of
> assume you do.
My company also does not use ToT. Being able to associate a product
with a well-known release is *very* important to us. It enables
communication with our customers. It allows
2015 Feb 13
10
[LLVMdev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
Hello testers,
Start your engines, RC3 has just been tagged (at r229050 on the
branch). If this one looks good, it will become the release.
There has been quite a bit of activity on the branch since RC2; let's
hope it's all goodness :-)
Please let me know how it looks, and upload binaries to the sftp as usual.
Thanks for all your efforts so far!
- Hans
2006 Feb 06
3
acts_as_threaded plugin
This plugin is related to the acts_as_nested_set functionality but differs
in that it allows multiple roots to exist within your database.
The other benefit, is that when adding a child, it doesn''t perform a full
table update to rebuild the tree, each child insertion only affects the tree
that it is placed in.
It even comes with my first screencast to show how you can build an old
2015 Feb 18
3
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joerg Sonnenberger" <joerg at britannica.bec.de>
> To: cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu, "llvmdev" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:42:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:12:20AM -0800, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> > I
2015 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
...On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Jack Howarth
> <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I finally got around to testing this on a Bloomfield processor (Early
>> 2009 MacPro 2x2.66 GHz dual-quad core) and the regressions from
>> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=22589 are even more severe. For
>> 10 runs of scimark2_1c built with "-O3 -march=native"...
>>
>> llvm 3.5.1 1204.16+/-2.66 Mflops
>> 3.6 branch 866.49+/-1.26 Mflops
>>
>
> The proposed patch mitigates the damage on Bloomfield...
>
> patched 3.6svn...
2014 Jan 28
3
[LLVMdev] MergeFunctions: reduce complexity to O(log(N))
Hi Stepan,
Sorry for the delay. It's great that you are working on MergeFunctions
as well and I agree, we should definitely try to combine our efforts to
improve MergeFunctions.
Just to give you some context, the pass (with the similar function
merging patch) is already being used in a production setting. From my
point of view, it would be better if we focus on improving its
capability
2014 Jan 30
3
[LLVMdev] MergeFunctions: reduce complexity to O(log(N))
...3 0 0.01 11031 0 0.01 11031
test.ll 7 16845 0 0.01 16826 0 0.01 16826
testloop.ll 1 49203 0 0.01 49170 0 0.01 49170
TestLoop.ll 2 3938 0 0.01 3929 0 0.01 3929
testtrace.ll 3 7048 0 0.01 7036 0 0.01 7036
textloc.ll 13 155311 0 0.02 155289 0 0.02 155289
tf.ll 7 10532 0 0.01 10503 0 0.01 10503
tg.ll 2 22589 0 0.01 22560 0 0.01 22560
tgood.ll 9 106366 0 0.02 106335 0 0.01 106335
threading.ll 0 452 0 0.01 423 0 0.01 423
Threads.ll 17 20611 1 0.01 19977 1 0.01 19977
throw_rethrow_test.ll 5 14502 0 0.01 14483 0 0.01 14483
ti.ll 3 16281 0 0.01 16252 0 0.01 16252
time.ll 1 1170 0 0.01 1149 0 0.00 1149
Time....