search for: blockid

...here is an interest, I’m also wondering whether (or how) to approach fixing this incrementally. For example, in trying to document the new paramattr format, I noticed that the type format is also outdated, and there is a conflict in block ids (i.e. the old TYPE_BLOCK format which is documented used blockid=10, but blockid=10 is now used for PARAMATTR_GROUP_BLOCK), so that fixing the paramattr docs on their own might introduce inconsistencies. Would it be better to try & bring the whole document up to date at once, or would it be fine to do it incrementally & possibly introduce some strangenes...

...here is an interest, I’m also wondering whether (or how) to approach fixing this incrementally. For example, in trying to document the new paramattr format, I noticed that the type format is also outdated, and there is a conflict in block ids (i.e. the old TYPE_BLOCK format which is documented used blockid=10, but blockid=10 is now used for PARAMATTR_GROUP_BLOCK), > > For this particular example, it should just be removed I think. If I read correctly the history the TYPE_BLOCK was a 2.9 thing. > > — > Mehdi > > >> so that fixing the paramattr docs on their own might in...

...t This section describes the representation of ThinLTO for bitcode-only intermediate files. ThinLTO Bitcode Blocks There will be three ThinLTO bitcode blocks nested within an outer THINLTO_BLOCK, which itself is nested within the outer MODULE_BLOCK: <MODULE_BLOCK> ... <THINLTO_BLOCK BlockID=19 ...> <THINLTO_SYMTAB_BLOCK BlockID=20 ...> </THINLTO_SYMTAB_BLOCK> <THINLTO_MODULE_STRTAB_BLOCK BlockID=21 ...> </THINLTO_MODULE_STRTAB_BLOCK> <THINLTO_FUNCTION_SUMMARY_BLOCK BlockID=22 ...> </THINLTO_FUNCTION_SUMMARY_BLOCK> </T...

...nLTO for bitcode-only > intermediate files. > ThinLTO Bitcode Blocks > > There will be three ThinLTO bitcode blocks nested within an outer > THINLTO_BLOCK, which itself is nested within the outer MODULE_BLOCK: > > <MODULE_BLOCK> > > ... > > <THINLTO_BLOCK BlockID=19 ...> > > <THINLTO_SYMTAB_BLOCK BlockID=20 ...> > > </THINLTO_SYMTAB_BLOCK> > > <THINLTO_MODULE_STRTAB_BLOCK BlockID=21 ...> > > </THINLTO_MODULE_STRTAB_BLOCK> > > <THINLTO_FUNCTION_SUMMARY_BLOCK BlockID=22 ...> > &g...

...they get mounted in different orders. The drive with my os7? sometimes is mounted as/dev/sda and sometimes /dev/sdc. In grub.cfg on the os7 partition there is a statement "set root=hd0, msdos3" I think that may be the villain but I don't know where it comes from. (The kernel lines use blockid's,) That statement is in centos7, but not in centos6 where I have not had the problem.? I intend to search a while, and maybe learn something or take out a couple of drives.Hopefully this helps. ?

...se question... I doubt I would have ever randomly guessed 'toupper' or 'tolower'. I am trying to be cleaver[1] and make a flexible data structure in R. I have a relatively large quantity of data that can be broadly grouped into blocks/chunks which are identical in their form: blockid = numeric blocktype = string dbname = string tblname = string quality = numeric errortype = numeric columnamount = data vector distr = data vector ... I have grouped the above into a list as it contains mixed variable types. Now is where things get a little more interesting... I h...

...b-settings:16] MYSQL("SIP/SipAgenT01-000008cb", "Connect connid localhost myuser mypwd myDB") in new stack [Oct  4 10:11:25] VERBOSE[4944] pbx.c: [Oct  4 10:11:25]     -- Executing [s at sub-settings:17] MYSQL("SIP/SipAgenT01-000008cb", "Query resultid 1 SELECT blockID from DID where DID=987654321") in new stack [Oct  4 10:11:29] VERBOSE[4961] config.c: [Oct  4 10:11:29]   == Parsing '/etc/asterisk/asterisk.conf': [Oct  4 10:11:29] VERBOSE[4961] config.c: [Oct  4 10:11:29]   == Found [Oct  4 10:11:29] VERBOSE[4961] manager.c: [Oct  4 10:11:29] == M...

...ipAgenT01-000008cb", "Connect connid >> localhost myuser mypwd myDB") in new stack >> [Oct  4 10:11:25] VERBOSE[4944] pbx.c: [Oct  4 10:11:25] -- Executing >> [s at sub-settings:17] MYSQL("SIP/SipAgenT01-000008cb", "Query resultid >> 1 SELECT blockID from DID where DID=987654321") in new stack >> [Oct  4 10:11:29] VERBOSE[4961] config.c: [Oct  4 10:11:29]   == >> Parsing '/etc/asterisk/asterisk.conf': [Oct 4 10:11:29] VERBOSE[4961] >> config.c: [Oct  4 10:11:29]   == Found >> [Oct  4 10:11:29] VERBOSE[4961...

...reamReader.h > @@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ public: > } > > /// EnterSubBlock - Having read the ENTER_SUBBLOCK abbrevid, enter > - /// the block, and return true if the block is valid. > + /// the block, and return true if the block has an error. > bool EnterSubBlock(unsigned BlockID, unsigned *NumWordsP = 0) { > // Save the current block's state on BlockScope. > BlockScope.push_back(Block(CurCodeSize)); > diff --git a/include/llvm/Bitcode/LLVMBitCodes.h b/include/llvm/Bitcode/LLVMBitCodes.h > index c1dc190..6c81739 100644 > --- a/include/llvm/Bitco...

Hi all, I've been looking into how to make llvm bitcode files smaller. There is one simple change that appears to shrink linked bitcode files by about 15%. See this spreadsheet for some rough data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjRrJHQc4_bddEtJdjdIek5fMDdIdFFIZldZXzdWa0E The change is in how operand ids are encoded in bitcode files. Rather than use an "absolute

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith < dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > > On 2017-Apr-04, at 12:12, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:08 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: >>

For the encryption functionality in the ZFS filesystem we use AES in CCM or GCM mode at the block level to provide confidentiality and authentication. There is also a SHA256 checksum per block (of the ciphertext) that forms a Merkle tree of all the blocks in the pool. Note that I have to store the full IV in the block. A block here is a ZFS block which is any power of two from 512 bytes to