Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "_lo".
Did you mean:
_l
2013 May 29
1
[RFC 7/11] virtio_pci: new, capability-aware driver.
...> > > > +{
> >> > > > + iowrite32((u32)val, (__le32 *)addr);
> >> > > > + iowrite32(val >> 32, (__le32 *)addr + 1);
> >> > > > +}
> >> > > > +
> >> > >
> >> > > Let's put addr_lo/addr_hi in the structure then,
> >> > > to make the fact this field is not atomic explicit?
> >> >
> >> > Good point, assuming I haven't missed something.
> >> >
> >> > Are 64-bit accesses actually unknown in PCI-land? Or is this...
2018 Jul 20
3
error: ordered comparison between pointer and zero ('address' (aka 'unsigned char *') and 'int')
...36 2018 +0100
+++ b/src/share/vm/opto/loopPredicate.cpp Fri Jul 20 10:06:37 2018 +0800
@@ -869,7 +869,7 @@
Node* idx = cmp->in(1);
assert(!invar.is_invariant(idx), "index is variant");
Node* rng = cmp->in(2);
- assert(rng->Opcode() == Op_LoadRange || _igvn.type(rng)->is_int()
>= 0, "must be");
+ assert(rng->Opcode() == Op_LoadRange ||
_igvn.type(rng)->is_int()->_lo >= 0, "must be");
assert(invar.is_invariant(rng), "range must be invariant");
int scale = 1;...
2018 Jul 23
2
error: ordered comparison between pointer and zero ('address' (aka 'unsigned char *') and 'int')
...Fri Jul 20 10:06:37 2018
>> +0800
>> @@ -869,7 +869,7 @@
>> Node* idx = cmp->in(1);
>> assert(!invar.is_invariant(idx), "index is variant");
>> Node* rng = cmp->in(2);
>> - assert(rng->Opcode() == Op_LoadRange || _igvn.type(rng)-
>>> is_int()
>> >= 0, "must be");
>> + assert(rng->Opcode() == Op_LoadRange ||
>> _igvn.type(rng)->is_int()->_lo >= 0, "must be");
>> assert(invar.is_invariant(rng), "range must be in...
2013 May 28
2
[RFC 7/11] virtio_pci: new, capability-aware driver.
...; +static void iowrite64(u64 val, const __le64 *addr)
> > > > +{
> > > > + iowrite32((u32)val, (__le32 *)addr);
> > > > + iowrite32(val >> 32, (__le32 *)addr + 1);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Let's put addr_lo/addr_hi in the structure then,
> > > to make the fact this field is not atomic explicit?
> >
> > Good point, assuming I haven't missed something.
> >
> > Are 64-bit accesses actually unknown in PCI-land? Or is this a limited
> > availability thing?
>...
2018 Jul 19
2
error: ordered comparison between pointer and zero ('address' (aka 'unsigned char *') and 'int')
Hi HotSpot and LLVM developers,
I am building OpenJDK8[1] with LLVM toolchain[2] for mips64el, it failed
to build:
/home/loongson/jdk8-mips/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp:52:35: error:
ordered comparison between pointer and zero ('address' (aka 'unsigned
char *') and 'int')
if (Universe::narrow_oop_base() > 0) { // Implies UseCompressedOops.
2017 Jan 05
3
[PATCH net-next] net: make ndo_get_stats64 a void function
...l_link_stats64 *stats)
{
struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
struct rtnl_link_stats64 temp;
@@ -3362,8 +3362,6 @@ static struct rtnl_link_stats64 *bond_get_stats(struct net_device *bond_dev,
memcpy(&bond->bond_stats, stats, sizeof(*stats));
spin_unlock(&bond->stats_lock);
-
- return stats;
}
static int bond_do_ioctl(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct ifreq *ifr, int cmd)
diff --git a/drivers/net/dummy.c b/drivers/net/dummy.c
index 6421835f11b7..1f2de4e8207c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dummy.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dummy.c
@@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ struct pcpu_dstats {
s...
2017 Jan 05
3
[PATCH net-next] net: make ndo_get_stats64 a void function
...l_link_stats64 *stats)
{
struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
struct rtnl_link_stats64 temp;
@@ -3362,8 +3362,6 @@ static struct rtnl_link_stats64 *bond_get_stats(struct net_device *bond_dev,
memcpy(&bond->bond_stats, stats, sizeof(*stats));
spin_unlock(&bond->stats_lock);
-
- return stats;
}
static int bond_do_ioctl(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct ifreq *ifr, int cmd)
diff --git a/drivers/net/dummy.c b/drivers/net/dummy.c
index 6421835f11b7..1f2de4e8207c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dummy.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dummy.c
@@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ struct pcpu_dstats {
s...