search for: 64d

...reg5 Joined. Result = %R25R24,inf = [0L,96d:0) 0 at 0L-phidef 32L %vreg5<def> = COPY %R25R24; PTRREGS:%vreg5 Not coalescable. 64L %vreg6<def> = COPY %vreg4<kill>; DLDREGS:%vreg6,%vreg4 Considering merging %vreg4 with %vreg6 to DLDREGS RHS = %vreg4 = [48d,64d:0) 0 at 48d LHS = %vreg6 = [64d,80d:1)[80d,112d:0) 0 at 80d 1 at 64d updated: 48L %vreg6<def> = LDWRd %vreg5<kill>; mem:LD2[%a](align=1)(tbaa=!"int") DLDREGS:%vreg6 PTRREGS:%vreg5 Joined. Result = %vreg6 = [48d,80d:1)[80d,112d:0) 0 at 80d 1 at 48d 96L...

...%R25R24,inf = [0L,96d:0) 0 at 0L-phidef > 32L %vreg5<def> = COPY %R25R24; PTRREGS:%vreg5 > Not coalescable. > 64L %vreg6<def> = COPY %vreg4<kill>; DLDREGS:%vreg6,%vreg4 > Considering merging %vreg4 with %vreg6 to DLDREGS > RHS = %vreg4 = [48d,64d:0) 0 at 48d > LHS = %vreg6 = [64d,80d:1)[80d,112d:0) 0 at 80d 1 at 64d > updated: 48L %vreg6<def> = LDWRd %vreg5<kill>; mem:LD2[%a](align=1)(tbaa=!"int") DLDREGS:%vreg6 PTRREGS:%vreg5 > Joined. Result = %vreg6 = [48d,80d:1)[80d,112d:0) 0 at 8...

On Mar 26, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Borja Ferrer wrote: > Hello Jakob, thanks for the reply. The three regclasses involved here are all subsets from each other and aren't disjoint. These are the basic descriptions of the regclasses involved to show what i mean: > > DREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R1R0 (16 regs) > DLDREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R17R16 (8 regs) > PTRREGS:

Hello Jakob, thanks for the reply. The three regclasses involved here are all subsets from each other and aren't disjoint. These are the basic descriptions of the regclasses involved to show what i mean: DREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R1R0 (16 regs) DLDREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R17R16 (8 regs) PTRREGS: R31R30, R29R28, R27R26 (3 regs) All classes intersect each other

...ffff828c8024fed8 xpv:do_page_fault+208 ffff828c8024ff18 xpv:handle_exception+45 ffffff003e031a90 unix:hati_pte_map+123 () ffffff003e031b10 unix:hati_load_common+15d () ffffff003e031bd0 unix:hat_devload+198 () ffffff003e031c80 xnb:xnb_to_peer+12c () ffffff003e031d40 xnb:xnb_copy_to_peer+64d () ffffff003e031d70 xnbo:xnbo_from_mac+20 () ffffff003e031db0 mac:mac_promisc_dispatch_one+5f () ffffff003e031e10 mac:mac_promisc_client_dispatch+8c () ffffff003e031e90 mac:mac_rx_srs_drain+117 () ffffff003e031f20 mac:mac_rx_srs_process+1db () ffffff003e032010 mac:mac_tx_send+519 () f...

Hello! I have problems compiling zaptel (tried 1.2.11, 1.2.10 and 1.4.0-beta2 -- all give the same error) with 2.6.19 kernel CC [M] /home/roman/install/asterisk/zaptel-1.4.0-beta2/xpp/card_fxo.o In file included from /home/roman/install/asterisk/zaptel-1.4.0-beta2/xpp/xpd.h:26, from /home/roman/install/asterisk/zaptel-1.4.0-beta2/xpp/card_fxo.c:28:

...scode.o CC [M] /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/base.o HOSTCC /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/fw2h /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/fw2h /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/OCT6114-128D.ima /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/vpmoct128_fw.h /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/fw2h /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/OCT6114-64D.ima /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/vpmoct064_fw.h CC [M] /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/vpm450m.o In file included from /usr/src/zaptel-1.4.0/wct4xxp/vpm450m.c:14: include/linux/firmware.h:11: warning: `struct device' declared inside parameter list include/linux/firmware.h:11: warning: its sco...

...t; > + 639: 73 65 jae 6a0 <__FUNCTION__.20138> > + 63b: 74 73 je 6b0 <__FUNCTION__.20138+0x10> > 63d: 5f pop %edi > 63e: 70 00 jo 640 <.str9> > > @@ -12060,93 +12060,93 @@ > 64d: 50 push %eax > ... > > -0000064f <__FUNCTION__.20708>: > - 64f: 72 65 jb 6b6 <__FUNCTION__.20223+0x16> > +0000064f <__FUNCTION__.20622>: > + 64f: 72 65 jb 6b6 <__FUNCTION__.20138+0x16> > 6...

The saga continues. I've been tracking the interface changes and merging them with the refactoring work I'm doing. I got as far as building stage3 of llvm-gcc but the object files from stage2 and stage3 differ: warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs (Are the above two ok?) The list below is clearly bad. I think it's every object file in the