search for: continuing

...](align=16)(tbaa=<0x3817578>)> t8, t7, t11, undef:i64 ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: t9: ch = store<ST256[bitcast ([65 x i32]* @c to <64 x i32>*)](align=16)(tbaa=<0x3817578>)> t8, t7, t11, undef:i64 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 14, continuing at 81 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 82, continuing at 149 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 150, continuing at 217 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 218, continuing at 267 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 2...

...L: Starting pattern match on root node: t9: ch = store<ST256[bitcast >>>> ([65 x i32]* @c to <64 x i32>*)](align=16)(tbaa=<0x3817578>)> t8, t7, >>>> t11, undef:i64 >>>> >>>> Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 14, continuing >>>> at 81 >>>> Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 82, continuing >>>> at 149 >>>> Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 150, continuing >>>> at 217 >>>> Skipped scope entry (due to fals...

...it goes back to 3259 and eventually it matches the wrong instruction. Why did go back from 3305 to 3259? In my XXXGenDAGISel.inc, I can see that the correct instruction is at index 3420 but it never got there. ISEL: Starting pattern match Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 3, continuing at 808 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 809, continuing at 865 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 867, continuing at 1091 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 1093, continuing at 1578 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at in...

...;>>>>>>>>>>> t8, t7, t11, undef:i64 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 14, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> continuing at 81 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 82, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> continuing at 149 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Skipped scope entry (due to false predicat...

...0>0|<s1>1}|add [ORD=21] [ID=29]|0x7fef2a033610|{<d0>i32}}"]; The debug output (-debug-only=isel) is: ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: 0x7fef2a033610: i32 = add 0x7fef2a033410, 0x7fef2a032f10 [ORD=21] [ID=29] Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 3, continuing at 2566 Match failed at index 2575 Continuing at 2628 Match failed at index 2639 Continuing at 2659 Match failed at index 2663 Continuing at 2700 Continuing at 2701 Continuing at 2702 Match failed at index 2703 Continuing at 2817 Match failed at index 2818 Continuing at 2901...

This is my new Centos7 DNS server. In logwatch I am seeing: **Unmatched Entries** dispatch 0xb4378008: open_socket(0.0.0.0#5546) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) dispatch 0xb4463008: open_socket(::#1935) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) dispatch 0xb4464440: open_socket(::#8554) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) dispatch 0xb4464440: open_socket(::#8614) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) d...

I have a samba version 3.024 server joined to a ADS as a "Workstation or server" acting as a file/print server. It is a Debian 4.0 amd64 up to date with stable. ftp works just fine so not network, must be samba config. vary slow file transfer when copying file from one computer but copy from two or more at the same time speed is 10 times faster. You will be copying a 600MG file with one

Let me show you the following simple C code: int main() { int i; for (i = 0; i < 256; i++) { i++; } } In this simple C code, if we use Clang to compile it and debug it: We will get something like this: (gdb) b main Breakpoint 1 at 0x100000f7b: file a.c, line 5. (gdb) r Starting program: a.out [New Thread 0x1403 of process 23435] warning: unhandled dyld version (15) Thread 2

I have an Apple iBook running OS X 10.2 connected to my network via an 802.11b wireless network. When I transfer files via SMB with my Windows 2000 computer, the speed seems reasonable. However, when I connect to a share on my Debian (x86) box (kernel 2.4.19) running Samba 2.2.3a-12 for Debian, the speed is only about a sixth as fast (transferring files to or from the Win2k box is about 6

I appear to have written code which travels backwards through time: http://www.vimeo.com/742590 This disturbs me immensely. If anyone can explain it, that would be cool. I think it''s an illusion brought about by how RSpec wraps the code it executes, and by the sheer weirdness of continuations. -- Giles Bowkett Blog: http://gilesbowkett.blogspot.com Portfolio:

Hello Im struggling on something... I have one continuous variable (A), and I need to explain it with 4 factors, and maybe one continuous covariate. And of course, my variable A is not normal at all (it's a duration in seconds, whole numbers). What can I do? I would know how do deal with it if I had one factor, maybe two, but in that case Im really not sure what I am supposed to do to

If we had a very naïve way of generating IR, in the 'continue' case you would actually see TWO branch instructions: one to implement the 'continue' statement, and one as part of the control flow of the 'for' loop. The branch for the 'continue' statement would have the source location of the 'continue' and the branch for the control-flow of the 'for'

Have you read http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMBackend.html and http://llvm.org/docs/CodeGenerator.html ? http://llvm.org/docs/WritingAnLLVMBackend.html#instruction-selector describes how to define a store instruction. -Eli On 7/6/2017 6:51 PM, hameeza ahmed via llvm-dev wrote: > Please correct me i m stuck at this point. > > On Jul 6, 2017 5:18 PM, "hameeza ahmed"

I need help translating extensions.conf to AEL: [default] exten => _X.,1,Set(DID=${EXTEN:6}) exten => _X.,n,Goto(continue,1) exten => _1X.,1,Set(DID=${EXTEN:7}) exten => _1X.,n,Goto(continue,1) exten => continue,1,Noop(${DID}) exten => continue,n,Set(GROUP(IAX)=incoming) exten => continue,n,GotoIf($[${MATH(${GROUP_COUNT(incoming at IAX)}+${GROUP_COUNT(outgoing at

Hi paulr: Thanks for your kindly response. Maybe I don't describe my question cleanly, let me show more information. From my side, I notice that whether we are in the continue keyword mode or we are in the right brace mode, the target of br instruction is the same, i.e. for loop Continue Keyword Mode: ; <label>:6: ; preds = %3 br label

...(align=16)(tbaa=<0x4452448>)> t9, t7, t12, undef:i64 ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: t10: ch = store<ST256[bitcast ([65 x i32]* @a to <64 x i32>*)](align=16)(tbaa=<0x4452448>)> t9, t7, t12, undef:i64 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 14, continuing at 81 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 82, continuing at 149 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 150, continuing at 217 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 218, continuing at 267 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 2...

...glue = EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG 0x2ebee18, 0x2ebef20, 0x2ebf658 [ORD=3] [ID=11] ISEL: Starting pattern match on root node: 0x2ebfa78: glue = EsenciaISD::SET_FLAG 0x2ebee18, 0x2ebef20, 0x2ebf658 [ORD=3] [ID=11] Initial Opcode index to 258 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 278, continuing at 292 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 293, continuing at 307 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 308, continuing at 322 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index 323, continuing at 337 Skipped scope entry (due to false predicate) at index...

Hello R users, I am working with the GAM to inspect the effect of some factors (year, area) and continuous variables (length, depth, latitude and longitude) on the intensity and prevalence of the common parasite Anisakis. I would like introduce interaction in my models, both "continuous variables-continuous variables" and "continuous variables-factor". I have read some

If the script is run during the system startup then it says "Continue with stateless boot". If the script is run from the command line then it says "Quite and Exit". Signed-off-by: Darryl L. Pierce <dpierce at redhat.com> --- scripts/ovirt-config-setup | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-- scripts/ovirt-firstboot | 2 +- 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

...specify some range of higher numbered ports: > > use-v4-udp-ports { range 10240 65535; }; > use-v6-udp-ports { range 10240 65535; }; But that is not the ports that I am seeing in logwatch: **Unmatched Entries** dispatch 0xb4463008: open_socket(::#8554) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) dispatch 0xb4463008: open_socket(::#8614) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) dispatch 0xb4464008: open_socket(::#8613) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) dispatch 0xb4465008: open_socket(::#4444) -> permission denied: continuing: 1 Time(s) d...