search for: calll

Hello R is pretty new to me. I need to write a function that returns three matrices of different dimensions. In addition, I need to call a function from a contributed package with the function. I have browsed several manuals and docs but the examples on them are either very simple or extremely hard to follow. Many thanks Ed [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi. On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 20:44:15 +0000, Sundar Nadathur wrote: > I am using RHEL 7.1 and libvirt 1.2.8. My intention is to intercept > the prepare and start hooks of libvirt during VM placement to > inject a virtio PCI device into the VM's domain xml. You are not supposed to talk to libvirtd from any hooks. > I placed a python script with execute permissions in >

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:43:21 +0000, Sundar Nadathur wrote: > Hello Jirka, > The script is not even invoked for prepare/start calls, not that it > is invoking libvirt APIs or is hanging. When it is invoked for > 'started', it runs to completion. Strange. Do you see corresponding "Calling hook" messages in libvirtd debug logs? (See

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 21:32:05 +0000, Sundar Nadathur wrote: > Hello, > Is there a reason why the prepare and start hooks cannot modify the > domain xml? Because they were not designed that way. It's already too late to change the domain definition in any of the hooks. > One would think it is a common use case to inject a device or some > content at VM creation

Anyone have any ideas as to why a call coming in won't ring the phone? I can call the phone from my cell and when I hear it ringing on the cell phone I pick up the house phone that should be ringing and am able to talk. I have tried two different pap2-na adapters, have verified the ports on my firewall and also a couple of different house phones. I am not running Asterisk yet but will be

Hi, I have an older phone with touch screen from Philips. It have it connected to Sipura 3000 FXS port and majority of features work ok. But phone also has touchscreen and web browser that I'd love to use for accessing my local web pages. But the phone only allows me to setup ISP phone number (username and password) and it wants to call it to get to Internet. Since it is connected to

...4: 56 pushl %esi > 5: 83 ec 40 subl $64, %esp > 8: 89 e0 movl %esp, %eax > a: c7 00 00 00 00 00 movl $0, (%eax) > 0000000c: IMAGE_REL_I386_DIR32 _foo > 10: e8 00 00 00 00 calll 0 <_setfoo+0x11> > 00000011: IMAGE_REL_I386_REL32 _debugPointer > 15: 89 e1 movl %esp, %ecx > 17: c7 01 00 00 00 00 movl $0, (%ecx) > 00000019: IMAGE_REL_I386_DIR32 _foo > 1d:...

...lang -O0 -fpic app.c -o app $ ./app opening a opening b clang and X sitting in a tree :) The relevant bits of objdump -R $ objdump -R liba.so | grep ex_func 2000210c R_386_JUMP_SLOT ex_func Looking at the asm here shows us that ex_func is always looked up in the PLT. $ grep ex_func a.s calll ex_func at PLT calll ex_func at PLT ======================================================================== With -O3 that doesn't work like X expects: ======================================================================== $ make clean rm -f a.o b.o liba.so libb.so app $ make CF...

...imizations disabled. Consider the following C code snippet: int foo(int x, int y); void bar() { foo(1, 2); foo(3, 4); } Clang/LLVM 6.0 generates the following assembly code: _bar: subl $32, %esp movl $1, %eax movl $2, %ecx movl $1, (%esp) movl $2, 4(%esp) movl %eax, 28(%esp) movl %ecx, 24(%esp) calll _foo movl $3, %ecx movl $4, %edx movl $3, (%esp) movl $4, 4(%esp) movl %eax, 20(%esp) movl %ecx, 16(%esp) movl %edx, 12(%esp) calll _foo movl %eax, 8(%esp) addl $32, %esp retl Note how the constants are stored in registers but when saving the parameters on the stack for the call the immediate valu...

...t; foo(3, 4); >> } >> >> Clang/LLVM 6.0 generates the following assembly code: >> _bar: >> subl $32, %esp >> movl $1, %eax >> movl $2, %ecx >> movl $1, (%esp) >> movl $2, 4(%esp) >> movl %eax, 28(%esp) >> movl %ecx, 24(%esp) >> calll _foo >> movl $3, %ecx >> movl $4, %edx >> movl $3, (%esp) >> movl $4, 4(%esp) >> movl %eax, 20(%esp) >> movl %ecx, 16(%esp) >> movl %edx, 12(%esp) >> calll _foo >> movl %eax, 8(%esp) >> addl $32, %esp >> retl >> >> Note h...

...t; 5: 83 ec 40 subl $64, %esp >>> 8: 89 e0 movl %esp, %eax >>> a: c7 00 00 00 00 00 movl $0, (%eax) >>> 0000000c: IMAGE_REL_I386_DIR32 _foo >>> 10: e8 00 00 00 00 calll 0 <_setfoo+0x11> >>> 00000011: IMAGE_REL_I386_REL32 _debugPointer >>> 15: 89 e1 movl %esp, %ecx >>> 17: c7 01 00 00 00 00 movl $0, (%ecx) >>> 00000019: IMAGE_REL_I386_...

I noticed that we generate code like this for i386 PIC: calll L0$pb L0$pb: popl %eax movl %eax, -24(%ebp) ## 4-byte Spill I worry that this defeats the return address prediction for returns in the function because calls and returns no longer are matched. From Intel's Optimization Reference Manual: "The return address stack mechanism augm...

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Nikodemus Siivola < nikodemus at random-state.net> wrote: > Uh. Turns out that if I hide the pointer to @foo from LLVM by passing it > through an opaque identity function ... then everything works fine. > > Is this a bug in LLVM or is there some magic involving globals I'm > misunderstanding? > This looks like a bug in the handling of

...s, for the 32-bit x86 calling convention, the transformation of MOV instructions that push function arguments onto the stack into actual PUSH instructions. For example, it will transform this: subl $16, %esp movl $4, 12(%esp) movl $3, 8(%esp) movl $2, 4(%esp) movl $1, (%esp) calll _func addl $16, %esp Into this: pushl $4 pushl $3 pushl $2 pushl $1 calll _func addl $16, %esp The main motivation for this is code size (a "pushl $4" is 2 bytes, a "movl $4, 12(%esp)" is 7 bytes), but there are some other advantages, as shown be...

...subq %rax, %rsp ; __chkstk does not adjust %rsp. ; W64: movq %rsp, %rbp diff --git a/test/CodeGen/X86/win_chkstk.ll b/test/CodeGen/X86/win_chkstk.ll index 3f522ea..0c02c1a 100644 --- a/test/CodeGen/X86/win_chkstk.ll +++ b/test/CodeGen/X86/win_chkstk.ll @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ entry: ; WIN_X32: calll __chkstk ; WIN_X64: callq __chkstk ; MINGW_X32: calll __alloca -; MINGW_X64: callq ___chkstk +; MINGW_X64: callq ___chkstk_ms ; LINUX-NOT: call __chkstk %array4096 = alloca [4096 x i8], align 16 ; <[4096 x i8]*> [#uses=0] ret i32 0 @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ entry: ; WIN_X64:...

>> Any thoughs? > > I'm now struggling to see how GCC justifies it. What if a different > translation-unit declared those variables in a different order? I also > can't get the same behaviour here, do you have a more complete > command-line? Ah, I see; the translation-unit that does the optimisation needs to have them as a definition (i.e. "= {0}") rather

> Could be, echristo, bigcheese, would this be correct for Mach-O and COFF? bigcheese noted on IRC that the test crashes the COFF emitter. For some reason I am always getting movl $256, %eax ## imm = 0x100 calll *%eax on darwin already, so I guess you are right, the correct would be isTargetELF() && TM.getRelocationModel() == Reloc::Static; Please include a test with the commit :-) Cheers, Rafael

...spindola at gmail.com>: >> Could be, echristo, bigcheese, would this be correct for Mach-O and COFF? > > bigcheese noted on IRC that the test crashes the COFF emitter. For some > reason I am always getting > >        movl    $256, %eax              ## imm = 0x100 >        calll   *%eax > > on darwin already IIRC, we never use Static on Darwin targets. -Eli

...gt;>> Could be, echristo, bigcheese, would this be correct for Mach-O and COFF? >> >> bigcheese noted on IRC that the test crashes the COFF emitter. For some >> reason I am always getting >> >>        movl    $256, %eax              ## imm = 0x100 >>        calll   *%eax >> >> on darwin already > > IIRC, we never use Static on Darwin targets. > > -Eli >

...bove program :* suyog at suyog-Inspiron-N5010:~$ Open/rbuild/bin/clang -S -O2 1.c main: # @main # BB#0: subl $28, %esp leal 20(%esp), %eax movl %eax, 8(%esp) leal 24(%esp), %eax movl %eax, 4(%esp) movl $.L.str, (%esp) calll __isoc99_scanf movl 20(%esp), %eax * orl 24(%esp), %eax* addl $28, %esp retl As seen, optimization happened at IR level itself reflected in .s file. *GCC output for the same:* suyog at suyog-Inspiron-N5010:~$ gcc -S -O2 1.c main: .LFB23: .cfi_startproc pushl...