search for: backstori

Brief backstory, previous admin is gone and the previous server died. What I could gather was it may have been running Icecast. I setup Icecast on a new CentOS 7 server and the server sits behind a firewall. The links from the users web site points to and internal address for internal users and an link to an external address. I created a listen.pls playlist with the following: [playlist]

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 05:36:03PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > On May 18, 2020, at 5:13 AM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > > > Is there a better alternative for mounting remote file systems > > over unreliable > > connections? > > I don?t have a good answer for you, because if you?d asked me > without all this backstory whether NFS or SSHFS is more

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 07:55:55PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > +int xb_preload_and_set_bit(struct xb *xb, unsigned long bit, gfp_t gfp); I'm struggling to understand when one would use this. The xb_ API requires you to handle your own locking. But specifying GFP flags here implies you can sleep. So ... um ... there's no locking? > +void xb_clear_bit_range(struct xb *xb, unsigned

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 07:55:55PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: > +int xb_preload_and_set_bit(struct xb *xb, unsigned long bit, gfp_t gfp); I'm struggling to understand when one would use this. The xb_ API requires you to handle your own locking. But specifying GFP flags here implies you can sleep. So ... um ... there's no locking? > +void xb_clear_bit_range(struct xb *xb, unsigned

Hi Sean, > Rafael gave me some of the backstory on this. Basically it is to work around some buggy behavior in the Darwin ar. Adding that on the front of the bitcode file just to get a version doesn't seem > like a very clean thing to do. > > Doug, what other alternatives did you guys consider before settling on this? > > As for #2 above, the non-universality of the wrapper

Hi all, Doug Yung started a discussion earlier ( http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2014-September/077227.html) about using the unused "version" field in the bitcode wrapper, and I think there was some misunderstanding. I'd like to clarify the motivation. The reason we want to add the version field is to easily identify "old" bitcode. It is only LLVM version

Hi, I'm trying to optimize a pattern like this into a single i16 load: %1 = bitcast i16* %pData to i8* %2 = load i8, i8* %1, align 1 %3 = zext i8 %2 to i16 %4 = shl nuw i16 %3, 8 %5 = getelementptr inbounds i8, i8* %1, i16 1 %6 = load i8, i8* %5, align 1 %7 = zext i8 %6 to i16 %8 = shl nuw nsw i16 %7, 0 %9 = or i16 %8, %4 I came across load combine pass which is motivated

Hello everyone, I'm trying to come up with the ideal DNS server configuration in consideration with Samba AD DC. The Samba wiki [1] says: > For high traffic environments, it is not recommended to use BIND9_DLZ-backed samba as a primary DNS server. Instead, use an external server that only forwards queries to BIND9_DLZ-backed samba DNS installations when the query is addressed to a zone

Roland, On 2020-09-10 21:27, Roland wrote: >> with rsync hanging - after breakout on /home for writing I then get: >> "Read-only file system" > > if your filesystem switches to read-only, you have a serious problem > with your system/storage, not with rsync. > > rsync (or the workload) is simply triggering the problem. Thanks for the response . . Hmm . .

Hi, after trying sshfs to mount a remote file system on a server with the result that sshfs will sooner or later get stuck and require a reboot of the client, I'm fed up with it and am looking for alternatives. So next I would like to use NFS over a VPN connection instead. To minimize the instances of the NFS mount getting stuck, it might be helpful to use autofs. What happens when the

One of the arguments for doing this earlier is inline cost perception of the original pattern. Reading i32/i64 by bytes look much more expensive than it is and can prevent inlining of interesting function. Inhibiting other optimizations concern can be addressed by careful selection of the pattern we’d like to match. I limit the transformation to the case when all the individual have no uses other

> On 29 Sep 2016, at 03:23, Sanjoy Das <sanjoy at playingwithpointers.com> wrote: > > Hi Artur, > > Artur Pilipenko via llvm-dev wrote: > > One of the arguments for doing this earlier is inline cost > > perception of the original pattern. Reading i32/i64 by bytes look much > > more expensive than it is and can prevent inlining of interesting > >

Hi, Can I ask what is the status of load widening. It seems there is no load widening on IR at all. // Paweł On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:49 PM Artur Pilipenko via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Philip and I talked about this is person. Given the fact that load > widening in presence of atomics is irreversible transformation we agreed > that we don't want to do

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Davide Italiano <davide at freebsd.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at

Ok, thanks. Are there any plans to reintroduce it on the IR level? I'm not confident this is strictly necessary, but in some cases not having load widening ends up really bad. Like in the case where vectorizer tries to do something about it: https://godbolt.org/z/60RuEw https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42708 At the current state I'm forced to use memset() to express uint64 load from

On 12/16/2017 07:28 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Wei Wang wrote: >> On 12/16/2017 02:42 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 07:55:55PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote: >>>> +int xb_preload_and_set_bit(struct xb *xb, unsigned long bit, gfp_t gfp); >>> I'm struggling to understand when one would use this. The xb_ API >>> requires you to

> -----Original Message----- > From: Tetsuo Handa [mailto:penguin-kernel at I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp] > Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2017 6:22 PM > To: Wang, Wei W <wei.w.wang at intel.com>; willy at infradead.org > Cc: virtio-dev at lists.oasis-open.org; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; qemu- > devel at nongnu.org; virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org; > kvm at

On 12/17/2017 11:16 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Wang, Wei W wrote: >>> Wei Wang wrote: >>>>> But passing GFP_NOWAIT means that we can handle allocation failure. >>>>> There is no need to use preload approach when we can handle allocation failure. >>>> I think the reason we need xb_preload is because radix tree insertion >>>> needs the

On May 18, 2020, at 5:13 AM, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > > Is there a better alternative for mounting remote file systems over unreliable > connections? I don?t have a good answer for you, because if you?d asked me without all this backstory whether NFS or SSHFS is more tolerant of bad connections, I?d have told you SSHFS. NFS comes out of the "Unix lab? world, where all

Hello, Just installed 2.1.0, and it seems to be working well. I have a problem I thought user auth on 2.1.0 would fix, namely, I want to control access to an icecast instance which is the source for the primary broadcast icecast. [backstory: a few months ago, the stream was originally broadcasting directly from a box in the engineering room, encoding from a booth line. Listeners would