Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "estricted".
Did you mean:
restricted
2007 Mar 26
3
[LLVMdev] C99 restrict
On Mar 25, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>>> So far, there hasn't been a discussion. IMO, the most important
>>> form is
>>> for formal arguments. That could easily be added thorough the
>>> use of an
>>> attribute on the parameter.
>>
>> I assume the idea here is to
2007 Mar 26
0
[LLVMdev] C99 restrict
On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 02:14:56AM -0500, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 25, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote:
> >> What about an approach not unlike how debugging information is
> >> handled? That
> >> is have an llvm intrinsic that encodes the known alias free range
> >> for
2012 Jul 06
8
[Bug 51798] New: Cannot enable second video card on nvidia quadro NVS420
...DRI status is given here and shows that the second video card (card1) is not
set to any PCI bus:
dristat -a
/dev/dri/card0
Busid: pci:0000:03:00.0
Version information:
Name: nouveau
Version: 1.0.0
Date: 20120316
Desc: nVidia Riva/TNT/GeForce
VM map information:
flags: (R)estricted (r)ead/(w)rite (l)ocked (k)ernel (W)rite-combine (L)ock:
slot offset size type flags address mtrr
0 0x11839000 0x00002000 SHM w L 0x1b7ff000 none
DRI client information:
a pid uid magic ioctls prog
y 1482 0 0 7 dristat...
2007 Mar 25
0
[LLVMdev] C99 restrict
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>> So far, there hasn't been a discussion. IMO, the most important form is
>> for formal arguments. That could easily be added thorough the use of an
>> attribute on the parameter.
>
> I assume the idea here is to avoid actually attributing the type (as was
> avoided with signed/unsigned integers by differentiating
2007 Mar 25
2
[LLVMdev] C99 restrict
On Mar 25, 2007, at 2:18 AM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>> Has there been any discussion of supporting the 'restrict' C99
>> keyword
>> and C++ extension to boost alias analysis? My impression is that this
>> would require modification of the LLVM IR. I couldn't find any
>> discussion hits using the usual
2007 Mar 26
6
[LLVMdev] C99 restrict
On Mar 26, 2007, at 10:10 AM, Dan Gohman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 02:14:56AM -0500, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mar 25, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>>>> What about an approach not unlike how debugging information is
>>>> handled? That
>>>> is have