search for: decls

On 9/1/06, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > > I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them > > like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to > > the tree. I'd like to make it as easy as possible to apply these, so > > let me know any rules I

When support for decl.Atomic and .Shared was added, tgsi_build_declaration was not updated to propagate these properly. Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> --- Changes in v2: -Add Reviewed-by: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> --- src/gallium/auxiliary/tgsi/tgsi_build.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6

Hi, Here are patches which implement the support for OpenCL kernel input parameters we discussed. They also add the tgsi parsing bits for adding support for global / local mem, but no implementation yet. Regards, Hans

...you much, Greg Ennis P.S. here is the output of make [root at SeVi ffmpeg]# make "/root/software/ffmpeg"/version.sh "/root/software/ffmpeg" gcc -fPIC -fomit-frame-pointer -g -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wall -Wno-switch -Wdisabled-optimization -Wpointer-arith -Wredundant-decls -Wno-pointer-sign -Wcast-qual -Wwrite-strings -O3 -I"/root/software/ffmpeg" -I"/root/software/ffmpeg" -I"/root/software/ffmpeg"/libavutil -I"/root/software/ffmpeg"/libavcodec -I"/root/software/ffmpeg"/libavformat -I"/root/software/ffmpeg"/...

...emType = memory_type; > > out[1].value = 0; > - out[1].decl_range.First = 0; > - out[1].decl_range.Last = 0; > + out[1].decl_range.First = memory_type; > + out[1].decl_range.Last = memory_type; > } > > static void > @@ -1854,8 +1855,10 @@ static void emit_decls( struct ureg_program *ureg ) > emit_decl_buffer(ureg, ureg->buffer[i].index, > ureg->buffer[i].atomic); > } > > - if (ureg->use_shared_memory) > - emit_decl_shared_memory(ureg); > + for (i = 0; i < TGSI_MEMORY_TYPE_COUNT; i++) { > + if (u...

Hi all, This patch is to fix a problem on PPC64 where an unaligned memcpy is generated. The testcase is this: $ cat testcase.c void Qux() { char Bar[11] = {0}; } What happens is that we produce LLVM code like this: call void @llvm.memcpy.i64( i8* %event_list2, i8* getelementptr ([11 x i8]* @C.103.30698, i32 0, i32 0), i64 11, i32 8 ) Notice that it has an 8-byte alignment. However, the Bar

...out[0].decl.Shared = true; + out[0].decl.MemType = memory_type; out[1].value = 0; - out[1].decl_range.First = 0; - out[1].decl_range.Last = 0; + out[1].decl_range.First = memory_type; + out[1].decl_range.Last = memory_type; } static void @@ -1854,8 +1855,10 @@ static void emit_decls( struct ureg_program *ureg ) emit_decl_buffer(ureg, ureg->buffer[i].index, ureg->buffer[i].atomic); } - if (ureg->use_shared_memory) - emit_decl_shared_memory(ureg); + for (i = 0; i < TGSI_MEMORY_TYPE_COUNT; i++) { + if (ureg->use_memory[i]) + emit_...

...out[0].decl.Shared = true; + out[0].decl.MemType = memory_type; out[1].value = 0; - out[1].decl_range.First = 0; - out[1].decl_range.Last = 0; + out[1].decl_range.First = memory_type; + out[1].decl_range.Last = memory_type; } static void @@ -1860,8 +1861,10 @@ static void emit_decls( struct ureg_program *ureg ) emit_decl_buffer(ureg, ureg->buffer[i].index, ureg->buffer[i].atomic); } - if (ureg->use_shared_memory) - emit_decl_shared_memory(ureg); + for (i = 0; i < TGSI_MEMORY_TYPE_COUNT; i++) { + if (ureg->use_memory[i]) + emit_...

On Nov 6, 2007, at 5:45 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > $ more testcase.c.t03.generic > Qux () > { > static char C.0[11] = {0}; > char Bar[11]; > > Bar = C.0; > } > > Anyway, it turns out that the gimplifier was generating the correct > alignment, but it was being overridden in assemble_variable(): > > /* On some machines, it is good to increase alignment

Hi all, Recently I’ve noticed in coverage profiles that llvm_unreachable and the like are considered uncovered because there’s no special behavior in instrumentation to ‘ignore’ noreturn paths. While I don’t necessarily think it’s ideal to ignore all noreturn decls, I think there’s definitely room for some heuristics around ignoring things like llvm_unreachable (perhaps opt-in?). I’m investigating emitting a zero region for all noreturn decls whilst codegenning, as a start. Anyone have any input as to a) if this is a good idea, or b) how best to implement an...

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael McCracken wrote: > Hi, I have a first quick patch and a question. The patch links f951 > with g++ when LLVM is enabled. It's at the end of this email. Thanks, applied! > I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them > like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to > the tree. I'd like to

...out[1].value = 0; >> - out[1].decl_range.First = 0; >> - out[1].decl_range.Last = 0; >> + out[1].decl_range.First = memory_type; >> + out[1].decl_range.Last = memory_type; >> } >> >> static void >> @@ -1854,8 +1855,10 @@ static void emit_decls( struct ureg_program *ureg ) >> emit_decl_buffer(ureg, ureg->buffer[i].index, >> ureg->buffer[i].atomic); >> } >> >> - if (ureg->use_shared_memory) >> - emit_decl_shared_memory(ureg); >> + for (i = 0; i < TGSI_MEMORY_TYPE_C...

...related solutions: - We should automatically emit zero mappings for code regions dominated by a call to a noreturn function. - We should offer some general way to 'turn off' coverage for arbitrary chunks of code. > While I don’t necessarily think it’s ideal to ignore all noreturn decls, I think there’s definitely room for some heuristics around ignoring things like llvm_unreachable (perhaps opt-in?). I think it's actually useful to have coverage for noreturn functions. Googletest lets you write death tests for this sort of thing. Maybe it makes sense to emit zero regions at...

Hi, I have a first quick patch and a question. The patch links f951 with g++ when LLVM is enabled. It's at the end of this email. I wanted to know if I should submit patches with comments around them like the "APPLE LOCAL LLVM" ones that mark the LLVM-only changes to the tree. I'd like to make it as easy as possible to apply these, so let me know any rules I should be following.

Hello, I recently ran into an issue where I wanted to use dyn_cast with a Multiple Inheritance hierarchy. LLVM’s help page on RTTI claims that it can be done, and that Clang’s Decl and DeclContext implement it; however, when I try to use it I run into odd behavior. Here’s my sample code which doesn’t work: ``` struct Base { void *ptr; bool hasInfo; }; struct Info { int size; static

On Sep 21, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > > My question is, is this liable to break something else down the line? > Should it be modified to call the getNamedGlobal method only if it's > an Objective-C property? Is this even the correct method for an > Objective-C property? There is a bigger question here. One invariant that is useful is that there is only a

On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:34 PM, James Molloy wrote: > Hi, > > I haven't seen those errors. Clang and LLVM both build with no warnings on the 3 versions of GCC I test with. MSVC reports loads of warnings however. > $ make happiness ... Updated to revision 142790. ... make[4]: Entering directory `/home/ecsardu/LLVM/build-tcclab1/tools/clang/tools/libclang' llvm[4]: Compiling

FreeBSD 9.3 Dovecot 2.25 (7be1766) I'm trying to install Dovecot2-pigeonhole-0.4.14_2 from ports. Get an error: cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-Wno-duplicate-decl-specifier" With options MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes: cc1: error: unrecognized command line option "-Wno-duplicate-decl-specifier" *** [edit-mail.lo] Error code 1 Stop in

...RNES make: Warning: File `code.C' has modification time 6e+02 s in the future m4 -s -Ulen -Uindex /mnt/hgfs/CentOS-4.6-i386_Shared/splash2/codes/null_macros/c.m4.null code.C > code.c gcc -c -O3 -pthread -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112 -Wall -W -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wredundant-decls -Wdisabled-optimization -Wpadded -Winline -Wpointer-arith -Wsign-compare -Wendif-labels code.c m4 -s -Ulen -Uindex /mnt/hgfs/CentOS-4.6-i386_Shared/splash2/codes/null_macros/c.m4.null code_io.C > code_io.c gcc -c -O3 -pthread -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112 -Wall -W -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-decla...

W dniu 23.09.2015 o 15:30, Timo Sirainen pisze: > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.19.rc1.tar.gz > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.19.rc1.tar.gz.sig > > A lot of changes since v2.2.18, so here's a release candidate first. If no bugs are reported, I'm planning on making the final release sometimes this week. The most interesting new features here