search for: deman

...ap approach will get most of the benefit. For those who really want to eliminate every check possible, a more expensive approach can be used on top of it. If someone is interested in array bound check elimination, I'd suggest starting with the ABCD (array bounds check elimination on deman) paper. I believe that vmkit would hugely benefit from this as well. -Chris

> Predsimplify is believed to have bugs (it results in miscompiled > programs) and certainly isn't efficient (it was written before much of > include/ADT). Finally, predsimplify is likely to go away once I or > someone else writes a proper VRP pass. Whoever does this, I strongly encourage looking into using (or at least providing optional support for) the Apron library:

..., is adopted by the toolmakers, then that's a perfectly good solution. <p>There is always the same question, whats first : Egg or chicken ? UCI is currently the only attempt ( at least to my knowledge ) to replace VfW and ACM with a new, modern opensource solution that can cope with the demans of modern video and audio codecs. If all codec developer waits with supporting it until all the others do, we all will wait forever. If Vorbis, Theora and XviD had an UCI interface, what developer of encoding tools could afford to hesitate suporting it ? Regards Christian --- >8 ---- List ar...

...; will get most of the benefit. For those who really want to eliminate > every check possible, a more expensive approach can be used on top of > it. If someone is interested in array bound check elimination, I'd > suggest starting with the ABCD (array bounds check elimination on > deman) paper. I believe that vmkit would hugely benefit from this as > well. > > -Chris > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >

I have a raidz2 pool with one disk that seems to be going bad, several errors are noted in iostat. I have an RMA for the drive, however - no I am wondering how I proceed. I need to send the drive in and then they will send me one back. If I had the drive on hand, I could do a zpool replace. Do I do a zpool offline? zpool detach? Once I get the drive back and put it in the same drive bay..

This might be a stupid question, but here goes... Would adding, say, 4 4 or 8gb usb keys as a zil make enough of a difference for writes on an iscsi shared vol? I am finding reads are not too bad (40is mb/s over gige on 2 500gb drives stripped) but writes top out at about 10 and drop a lot lower... If I where to add a couple usb keys for zil, would it make a difference? Thanks. Sent from a

Hello-- I'm trying to work through the last piece of the puzzle regarding dns resolution for my guests. To do so I'd like to be able to pass the following to the dnsmasq child process: -S /private.net/127.0.0.1 (as referenced in the dnsmasq man page) -S /sub.private.net/127.0.0.1 However, I cannot find any documentation that suggests the xml schema defining the virtual network supports