search for: aha

...in my changes to your patch, which results in the attached > patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have > with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in > llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the > MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and > llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: > -- > ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling -o foo.bc > ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o - | gcc -x assembler - -x none > ~/llvm/Debug/lib/profile_rt.d...

...your patch, which results in the attached >> patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have >> with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in >> llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the >> MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and >> llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: >> -- >> ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling -o foo.bc >> ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o - | gcc -x assembler - -x none >> ~/llvm/De...

...your patch, which results in the attached >> patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have >> with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in >> llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the >> MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and >> llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: >> -- >> ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling -o foo.bc >> ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o - | gcc -x assembler - -x none >> ~/llvm/De...

...ch results in the attached >>> patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have >>> with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in >>> llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the >>> MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and >>> llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: >>> -- >>> ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling -o foo.bc >>> ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o - | gcc -x assembler - -x none &g...

...ch results in the attached >>> patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have >>> with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in >>> llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the >>> MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and >>> llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: >>> -- >>> ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling -o foo.bc >>> ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o - | gcc -x assembler - -x none &g...

...ion=75625 I merged in my changes to your patch, which results in the attached patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: -- ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling -o foo.bc ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o - | gcc -x assembler - -x none ~/llvm/Debug/lib/profile_rt.dylib ddunbar at giles:aha...

Hi, this is the first in a series of patches to cleanup and improve the LLVM Profiling Infrastructure. First and foremost this patch removes duplicate functionality from ProfileInfoLoader and ProfileInfo: The ProfileInfoLoader performed not only the loading of the profile information but also some synthesis of block and function execution counts from edge profiling information. Since the

...e attached >>>> patch. There may be some missed merge errors. The main problem I have >>>> with the rest of this patch is that it causes a regression in >>>> llvm-prof's behavior. I tried running edge profiling on the >>>> MultiSource/Applications/aha benchmark in the llvm test-suite, and >>>> llvm-prof no longer prints any function information: >>>> -- >>>> ddunbar at giles:aha$ opt -f Output/aha.linked.rbc -insert-edge-profiling >>>> -o foo.bc >>>> ddunbar at giles:aha$ llc foo.bc -o...

I have patches to add locking to the adv(4), adw(4), aha(4), ahb(4), aic(4), and bt(4) drivers so that they no longer use Giant. I would appreciate any testing folks are able to do. The patches are against HEAD but should apply to 8 or 9. Make sure you have INVARIANTS and INVARIANT_SUPPORT enabled for any initial testing that you do. Thanks! htt...

I am running CentOS 4.7, presently on an older box (PIII slot 1 processor @ 500mhz with 384meg of RAM, using SCSI disks with an AHA-2940 host controller). I have built a new box: AMH Semporon 2.<mumble> GHZ, 2gig of RAM. I put in a AHA-29160 host controller (uses same driver as the AHA-2940). The motherboard is an ASROCK thing with nVideo's chipset: nv's SATA controller and nv's integrated network (forcedet...

...(1) kill -USR2 `cat unicorn.pid` (via Capistrano deployment task for example) (2) Inside the "before_exec" hook in the config file, do: kill -QUIT `cat unicorn.pid.oldbin` My question is: By the time the "before_exec" hook is executed, is it guaranteed that unicorn.pid.oldbin ahas lready created (otherwise we have a racing condition here)? Or is there a better way to achieve what I want? Please Cc me as I am not on the mailing list. Please also let me know if there is a better place to ask this question. Thanks, Pai-Hung

...Tests Summary > > Status Group # > Performance Regressions 17 > Performance Improvements 6 > Added Tests 2 > Unchanged Tests 938 > *Total Tests* *963* > > > Changes Detail > > Performance Regressions Δ Previous Current σ > MultiSource/Applications/aha/aha.exec 12.07% 3.5424 3.9698 0.0002 > MultiSource/Benchmarks/VersaBench/bmm/bmm.exec 11.38% 2.2970 2.5585 0.0007 > External/SPEC/CFP2000/179_art/179_art.exec 10.95% 1.4190 1.5744 0.0013 > MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod.exec 6.81% 11.8149 12.6195 0.0267 > External/SPEC/CINT20...

it seems that when you say "check for new mail" in apple mail, it sends a NOOP to the imap server to get the response. in uw, the conversation is something like: 25 NOOP 25 OK NOOP completed 26 NOOP * 2796 EXISTS * 7 RECENT 26 OK NOOP completed however, with dovecot, if it has already notified the client that new mail has arrived, it will look something like: * 24 EXISTS * 2 RECENT

Consider the following method: def name_to_terminal puts "Scott Taylor" end How would I spec this out? Scott

> The issue here is more arbitrary differences due to different default > code generation choices; for example, clang defaults to generating > SSE2 code, while llvm-gcc defaults to using x87 FP. Aha, this explains some apparently bizarre results such as the second one (018427, d) on this page: http://embed.cs.utah.edu/embarrassing/dec_09/harvest/llvm-gcc-head_clang-head/ I had been wondering about this one. John

On 22/09/10 18:07, Jim Grosbach wrote: [...] > Are you running 'opt' on your bitcode or otherwise manually running those passes? Aha. After running opt I now have inlined (and much better) code. Previously I'd been using llc -O3 to do the optimisation. What's the different between opt -O3 and llc -O3, then? -- ┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ───── │ "To be is to do" -- Nietzche │ "To do...

Hello, does CentOs 5 supports an Adaptec AHA-2940W/2940UW scsi controller (pci)? Is this controller maybe supported by the aic7xxx driver? I want to install CentOS 5 on my desktop pc but the currently installed pci scsi controller for my scanners (drivers: 2x tmscsim, 1x advansys) are not supported by CentOS. So I am searching for something...

On Thursday 11 October 2007 11:24, David Greene wrote: > Somehow PointerType::get is returning a 64-bit pointer even though > -m32 was passed to llvm-gcc. > > I'll see if I can figure out where the 64-bit code warning is emitted and > what triggers it. Aha! I found this previous thread: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2007-May/009177.html I am now trying to build with --disable-multilib. I'll bet llvm-gcc doesn't support multilib compilers right now. I'll let you know how it turns out....

...t;> Performance Regressions 17 >> Performance Improvements 6 >> Added Tests 2 >> Unchanged Tests 938 >> *Total Tests* *963* >> >> >> Changes Detail >> >> Performance Regressions Δ Previous Current σ >> MultiSource/Applications/aha/aha.exec 12.07% 3.5424 3.9698 0.0002 >> MultiSource/Benchmarks/VersaBench/bmm/bmm.exec 11.38% 2.2970 2.5585 0.0007 >> External/SPEC/CFP2000/179_art/179_art.exec 10.95% 1.4190 1.5744 0.0013 >> MultiSource/Applications/JM/lencod/lencod.exec 6.81% 11.8149 12.6195 0.0267 >> Exte...

...devel/2014-December/000680.html but it was only two nights of hacking, then I had to go to something else. The original observation of mine was that we were bottlenecking on the tinc output stage, and dropping at the input stage, with about 30ms latency on the hardware I was trying - where I said AHA! fq_codel in vpnspace might be useful, might scale better to multiple cores, even... and then there was another AHA! when I realized the meshy bits of tinc could be mapped over a received /64 without exposing all that much over a single flow tinc.... making the vpn bits incur nearly zero delay for...