search for: branches

class BranchesController < ApplicationController def branch @branch = Branch.new (params[:branch]) branch_back = @branch.*branch* end end in the model have one *branch.rb* class Branch def branch end end In the view have one branches folder, also have the branch.html.erb in that folde...

...hope this is the case. The official git mirror > documentation says it is only trunk because the current branching scheme > in not suitable for git. I don't understand why that would be but I'm > not a git-svn expert. It doesn't work because git-svn assumes that all of your branches begin at the same position in the SVN tree, i.e. llvm/branches/*. The problem is that we have some branches in llvm/branches/*, some in llvm/branches/Apple/*, some in llvm/branches/ggrief/*, etc. The end result is that git-svn gets horribly confused. --Owen

...ee 11 patches in that branch with the last patch having no parent. >> >> Could somebody please fix this? > This looks like git-svn bug. If anyone knows "the cure" I'd be happy > to apply it. In your svn section of llvm/.git/config, you can specify how to map the svn branches to different name spaces, something like this: [svn-remote "svn"] [...] branches = branches/*:refs/remotes/origin/* fetch = branches:refs/remotes/origin I would also change "branches = branches/*:refs/remotes/origin/*" into something like "branches...

Hi, I would like to transform unpredictable conditional branches with a small body into cmov instructions to reduce branch miss penalty. LLVM generates cmov/setcc instructions when SelectInst is used. The idea is to transform regular branches into selects, when that is possible and profitable. However this needs branch prediction info, and it seems LLVM doesn...

...llvm-cov a. The notion of CoverageSegment needs to be extended to comprehend the branch condition data represented by a CounterMappingRegion above. But then llvm-cov can treat the segment distinctly when displaying True/False counts for each branch condition as well as tracking total missed branches. b. We can also add a BranchCoverageInfo class to track branch coverage data, similar to LineCoverageInfo and RegionCoverageInfo. c. The text output could look something like GCOV but with more detail that we know (I prototyped this using logical-or): 9| |int main(int argc,...

...verage? Sorry I can't find any compelling documents to describe the accurate algorithm on this issue. I just thought gcov/lcov won't consider *how many times the decision evaluated to False.* * P*lease see the gcov file on my example: simple.cc. There are 6 branches in total which are all hit So the result would be 6/6 * 100% = 100% [image: cov3.png] - Are there any existing post-processing tools based on clang/llvm source based coverage? I just saw a clion plugin <https://github.com/zero9178/C-Cpp-Coverage-for-C...

Hi Martin, On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 14:10, Martin J. O'Riordan <MartinO at theheart.ie> wrote: > $ git branch --list > * master > martino By default "git branch" only lists local branches. "git branch -a" will list all of them, including (for me) "remotes/origin/release_70". If you just type "git checkout release_70" git will probably automatically detect it and set the local branch up to track it. > but I don't see a v7.0.0 specific tag or bran...

...s, can you clarify what you are suggesting? Your statement is sufficiently ambiguous that it could mean one of several things. Just so that everyone knows, SAFECode branching and development works a little differently than LLVM. With LLVM, nearly all development happens on the trunk, and then branches are created for each release. Changes are selectively folded into the release branch until the release is blessed, and then (generally speaking) the release branch isn't touched again. SAFECode works differently. With SAFECode, there is a release_xx branch for each release of LLVM that w...

...s, Ted Xie Phipps, Alan <a-phipps at ti.com> 于2020年4月28日周二 下午10:14写道： > Hi Ted, > > > > Presently, branch coverage is not supported in clang source-based code > coverage, but I am working on implementing branch condition coverage right > now. It will track True/False branches for each leaf-level condition, > including within Boolean expressions comprised of logical operators (“&&”, > “||”). Technically, this condition-based coverage is more granular than > how “branch coverage” is often defined (tracking on that control flow > decisions allow for al...

> I recommend that you stick with the release_19 branch of both llvm and > llvm-poolalloc. I and others are actively using these branches, so > llvm-poolalloc bug fixes will most likely be made to this branch in > addition to mainline CVS for the forseeable future. The release_19 > branch of llvm-poolalloc is designed to always work with the release_19 > branch of LLVM, which has a fixed API and bytecode format. I did n...

Hi, According to the webpage [1], 6.1 has been branched on April 5. However, I noticed that there is a tag called RELENG_6_1, not a branch called RELENG_6_1. For example, sys/conf/newvers.sh [2], rev 1.69.2.11, is on RELENG_6 branch with tag RELENG_6_1_BP and RELENG_6_1. It is a bit strange for me. At least, we have RELENG_X_Y branch before and RELENG_X_Y_BP tag. Is there any special reason that

Hi, llvm/clang experts I need to get the branch coverage for some testing code. But i found gcov can't give a expected coverage which may count some 'hidden branch' in (See stackoverflow answer <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42003783/lcov-gcov-branch-coverage-with-c-producing-branches-all-over-the-place>). Instead, I turn to use clang and the 'source-based code coverage' feature may be a right choice. But i can't find anything to describe branch coverage explicitly on the official site <https://clang.llvm.org/docs/SourceBasedCodeCoverage.html>. So how to us...

...elated to any of the patches I apply in the packages: FAIL: LLVM :: CodeGen/X86/2009-06-05-VZextByteShort.ll (3502 of 9333) ******************** TEST 'LLVM :: CodeGen/X86/2009-06-05-VZextByteShort.ll' FAILED ******************** Script: -- /home/sylvestre/dev/debian/pkg-llvm/llvm-toolchain/branches/llvm-toolchain-3.4-3.4+205824/build-llvm/Release/bin/llc < /home/sylvestre/dev/debian/pkg-llvm/llvm-toolchain/branches/llvm-toolchain-3.4-3.4+205824/test/CodeGen/X86/2009-06-05-VZextByteShort.ll -march=x86 -mattr=+mmx,+sse2 > /home/sylvestre/dev/debian/pkg-llvm/llvm-toolchain/branches/llvm-to...

On 11 May 2017 at 18:30, Michael Clark via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I note that on your bug that you have stated that the branch is faster than > the conditional move. Faster code is a side effect of the fix in this > particular case. On the contrary: the faster code is pretty much the only reason this can happen before the rest of the FENV support lands.

Tanya M. Lattner wrote: >>I recommend that you stick with the release_19 branch of both llvm and >>llvm-poolalloc. I and others are actively using these branches, so >>llvm-poolalloc bug fixes will most likely be made to this branch in >>addition to mainline CVS for the forseeable future. The release_19 >>branch of llvm-poolalloc is designed to always work with the release_19 >>branch of LLVM, which has a fixed API and bytecode form...

The proposed mitigation for variant 2 of CVE-2017-5715, “branch target injection”, is to send all indirect branches through an instruction sequence known as a retpoline. Because the purpose of a retpoline is to prevent attacker-controlled speculation, we also end up losing the benefits of benign speculation, which can lead to a measurable loss of performance. We can regain some of those benefits if we know that...

( I don't know if it's allowed to ask such question, if not, please remind me. ) I know Intel implemented several static branch prediction mechanisms these years: * 80486 age: Always-not-take * Pentium4 age: Backwards Taken/Forwards Not-Taken * PM, Core2: Didn't use static prediction, randomly depending on what happens to be in corresponding BTB entry , according to agner's

Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com> writes: > It doesn't work because git-svn assumes that all of your branches > begin at the same position in the SVN tree, i.e. llvm/branches/*. The > problem is that we have some branches in llvm/branches/*, some in > llvm/branches/Apple/*, some in llvm/branches/ggrief/*, etc. The end > result is that git-svn gets horribly confused. What options were used wi...

On Mar 29, 2008, at 6:02 AM, Török Edwin wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to transform unpredictable conditional branches with a > small body into cmov instructions to reduce branch miss penalty. > LLVM generates cmov/setcc instructions when SelectInst is used. The > idea > is to transform regular branches into selects, when that is possible > and > profitable. LLVM is already aggressively turni...

...llvm-cov a. The notion of CoverageSegment needs to be extended to comprehend the branch condition data represented by a CounterMappingRegion above. But then llvm-cov can treat the segment distinctly when displaying True/False counts for each branch condition as well as tracking total missed branches. b. We can also add a BranchCoverageInfo class to track branch coverage data, similar to LineCoverageInfo and RegionCoverageInfo. c. The text output could look something like GCOV but with more detail that we know (I prototyped this using logical-or): 9| |int main(int argc,...