search for: disjointness

Hello all. I'm investigating a problem with "Machine Instruction Scheduling" that is rooted in incorrect alias information. Things go wrong in the "Merge disjoint stack slots"[1] pass when a store instruction fails to get updated after its stack slot is merged. As a result, when "Machine Instruction Scheduling" runs, it incorrectly re-orders the store and a

Hi Lang, While working on improving the debug dumps of the PBQP graphs, I found out that we can have some edges between nodes which belong to totally disjoint register classes (for example, on AArch64, this would be an int and a floating point register). Although it is true those 2 registers interferes, in the sense they are alive at the same time, they never have any physical interference,

Hello, Is there any way I can use the gregexpr functions (or a different function) in a manner that will also return overlapping (i.e. non disjoint) regular expressions? For instance, when running gregexpr("AAA","AAAAAA"), I get two matches, one at position 1 and one at position 4. I'd like to receive 4 matches at positions 1, 2, 3 and 4. Thanks, Schraga

Dear All: We have been experiencing networking issues so I don't know if this got through; I can't see it in the archive. My sincere apologies if this appears twice. I may have found an unusual bug and am posting here to see if anyone can reproduce it on their system. First of all, sessionInfo(): > sessionInfo() R version 2.7.1 (2008-06-23) i386-apple-darwin8.10.1 locale:

Hi Matthew, > I'm investigating a problem with "Machine Instruction Scheduling" that is rooted > in incorrect alias information. > > Things go wrong in the "Merge disjoint stack slots"[1] pass when a store > instruction fails to get updated after its stack slot is merged. As a result, > when "Machine Instruction Scheduling" runs, it incorrectly

So, you can't have disjoint sets, and have one of set that says "i access everything". Because it would contain everything :) Thus, I assume by your description you meant "we want to maintain multiple disjoint partitions of the same set of accesses" (which is not quite the same as just having one special partition). When one partition is a refinement of the other (as

Specifically what I am asking is, if I have a computer named ralph$ who is uidNumber 678 in ou=Computers and I have a user who is uidNumber 678 in ou=People, will this cause problems? Must the different sets of uidNumbers be disjoint acrossed different ou's?

Hi Mon Ping, I've again attached a patch, wich lets LLVM know about about the relations between different address spaces. Instead of cramming this info in with TargetData (with all kinds of unwanted side effects, especially for the IR), I opted to create a new pass, TargetAddrspaces, which holds this information. Just like TargetData, this can be added to the passmanager by the tool running

Hi, is it possible to use a so called disjointed namespaces without having to "fake" the hosts fqdn giving it the AD-name as hostname? Background: We have a unix and a Windows world and each runs below it's domain. Let's say UNIX-DOMAIN and WIN-DOMAIN. When there is the need to bring the two worlds together the first choice is to use samba4 on unix joined to the AD domain name

Hi Matthijs, Sorry for not responding earlier. I have a few comments. On Aug 7, 2008, at 7:41 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi Mon Ping, > > I've again attached a patch, wich lets LLVM know about about the > relations > between different address spaces. Instead of cramming this info in > with > TargetData (with all kinds of unwanted side effects, especially for

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jun 12, 2015, at 1:51 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > > So, you can't have disjoint sets, and have one of set that says "i > access everything". Because it would contain everything :) > > Thus, I assume by your description you meant "we want to

On 08/11/2013 08:41 AM, Micah Villmow wrote: > How about this as a solution. > > Add one hook into TargetInstrInfo, and one into TargetISelLowering. > > 1) getAddressSpaceRelation(unsigned AS1, unsigned AS2) - Returns either disjoint, subset, superset, equal. Function defaults to equal. > 2) isAddressSpaceSupported(unsigned AS) - Returns true if supported, false otherwise.

Hi Mon Ping, > If I remember correctly, I was also not fond of passing another > TargetAddrSpace reference to the TargetData object. I was hoping that we > could encode the information as a target description string like we do for > ABI information. I just don't want to end up with too many objects that > describe the machine. One can argue that we shouldn't pollute

Attention R users, especially those that are experienced enough to be opinionated, I need your input. Consider the following simple plot: x <- rnorm(100) y <- rnorm(100) plot(x, y, bty='n') A colleague (and dreaded SAS user) commented that she thought that my plots could be "cleaned up" by connecting the X and Y axes. I know that I can do that with bty='l' but I

Hi Clemens, On 02/02/12 14:25, Clemens Hammacher wrote: > On 2/2/12 1:51 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: ... >> what do you mean by "copied over to the main module"? If you want to add >> additional IR to the main module then you should link it in using the linker. > > I think that the linker would indeed be able to remap the types correctly, but > the main obstacle here

Am 09.02.2016 um 16:28 schrieb Jeff Sadowski: > Most major distros compile samba with out the ability to do AD DC (Ubutum, > Fedora, Suse) > Fedora's documentation since samba 4.0 has stated > "We'll provide Samba AD DC functionality as soon as its support of MIT > Kerberos KDC will be ready." > This is even provided in 4.4.0rc1 build of samba for fedora

Hi , I need to use ntlm_auth across two different AD domains and their is no trust between the 2 domains. I followed the post http://samba-multiple-domains.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/how-to-join-one-linux-box-to-two.html <https://deref-mail.com/mail/client/44YIgEylY9w/dereferrer/?redirectUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fsamba-multiple-domains.blogspot.co.uk%2F2010%2F03%2Fhow-to-join-one-linux-box-to-two.html>

I'm working on a backend for a target with multiple functional units, each with a dedicated register file. Several instructions can operate on any one of the functional units. For example there is an add instruction on the A unit that adds two A registers, and another on the D unit that adds two D registers, but neither can use the other's registers. From a selection point of view either

I have been looking through the LLVM documentation, and I have decided that I would be interested in producing a functional front-end for it, if only to determine how applicable the optimizations that it already performs are to such a language. However, I have run into one obstacle that would make it difficult to write many of the things I would like to do. Is there a way to represent a

> Can you explain why the alias sets are collapsed into one here? If I'm reading the code correctly, it is because the readonly call aliases all of %a, %b and %c. Since two pointers can be in two different alias sets only if they do not alias, %a has to be in the same alias set as the read only call and so does %b and %c. Therefore, all of them have to be in the same alias set. > Can