search for: getint

...4 +71,3 @@ localboot_msg db 'Booting from local disk...', CR, LF, 0 section .text16 -%endif ; HAS_LOCALBOOT diff --git a/core/parseconfig.inc b/core/parseconfig.inc index e7b3108..d2c5715 100644 --- a/core/parseconfig.inc +++ b/core/parseconfig.inc @@ -85,8 +85,6 @@ pc_ipappend: call getint ; ; "localboot" command ; -%if HAS_LOCALBOOT - pc_localboot: call getint cmp byte [VKernel],0 ; ("label" section only) je .err @@ -94,8 +92,6 @@ pc_localboot: call getint mov byte [VKernelBuf+vk_type],VK_LOCALBOOT .err: ret -%endif ; HAS_LOCALBOOT - ; ; &quot...

Rather than “fixing” it, it might be better to support a separate method for signed extension. My reasoning is as follows: int x = 7; llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, int> pip; pip.setInt(x); There could be code out there that expects pip.getInt() to return 7 and not -1. So if you really want to set a negative and return a negative value, a separate method setSignedInt and getSignedInt may be OK. Further, sign-extension would need two shift instructions in X86 as opposed to no-sign extension where only one ‘and’ with mask is needed for re...

...:Riyaz.Puthiyapurayil at synopsys.com>> wrote: Rather than “fixing” it, it might be better to support a separate method for signed extension. My reasoning is as follows: int x = 7; llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, int> pip; pip.setInt(x); There could be code out there that expects pip.getInt() to return 7 and not -1. So if you really want to set a negative and return a negative value, a separate method setSignedInt and getSignedInt may be OK. Further, sign-extension would need two shift instructions in X86 as opposed to no-sign extension where only one ‘and’ with mask is needed for re...

...n “fixing” it, it might be better to support a separate method > for signed extension. My reasoning is as follows: > > > > int x = 7; > > llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, int> pip; > > pip.setInt(x); > > > > There could be code out there that expects pip.getInt() to return 7 and > not -1. > > > > So if you really want to set a negative and return a negative value, a > separate method setSignedInt and getSignedInt may be OK. Further, > sign-extension would need two shift instructions in X86 as opposed to > no-sign extension where on...

...tive values to and then read from a signed bit-field, you would do sign extension. So 3-bit signed types do exist in C++. It begs the question why PointerIntPair supports signed int types if it always loses the sign. Is it just to avoid signed/unsigned comparison when comparing the return value of getInt with signed types? Or to use enums that default to a signed type? In any case, this should be clearly documented if there is no intention to fix it. / Riyaz On Apr 4, 2018, at 4:04 AM, Florian Hahn <florian.hahn at arm.com<mailto:florian.hahn at arm.com>> wrote: On 04/04/2018 11:15...

...ate method >> for signed extension. My reasoning is as follows: >> >> >> >> int x = 7; >> >> llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, int> pip; >> >> pip.setInt(x); >> >> >> >> There could be code out there that expects pip.getInt() to return 7 and >> not -1. >> >> >> >> So if you really want to set a negative and return a negative value, a >> separate method setSignedInt and getSignedInt may be OK. Further, >> sign-extension would need two shift instructions in X86 as opposed to &gt...

...from a signed > bit-field, you would do sign extension. So 3-bit signed types do exist in > C++. > > It begs the question why PointerIntPair supports signed int types if it > always loses the sign. Is it just to avoid signed/unsigned comparison when > comparing the return value of getInt with signed types? Or to use enums > that default to a signed type? In any case, this should be clearly > documented if there is no intention to fix it. > > > / Riyaz > > On Apr 4, 2018, at 4:04 AM, Florian Hahn <florian.hahn at arm.com> wrote: > > > > On 04/0...

...xing” it, it might be better to support a separate method for signed extension. My reasoning is as follows: > > > > int x = 7; > > llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, int> pip; > > pip.setInt(x); > > > > There could be code out there that expects pip.getInt() to return 7 and not -1. > > > > So if you really want to set a negative and return a negative value, a separate method setSignedInt and getSignedInt may be OK. Further, sign-extension would need two shift instructions in X86 as opposed to no-sign extension where only one ‘and’ wit...

...je near pc_prompt cmp ax,'fo' ; FOnt je near pc_font cmp ax,'kb' ; KBd je near pc_kbd cmp ax,'di' ; DIsplay je near pc_display cmp ax,'la' ; LAbel je near pc_label @@ -1260,20 +1267,27 @@ jmp short parse_config_2 pc_timeout: call getint ; "timeout" command jc parse_config_2 mov ax,0D215h ; There are approx 1.D215h mul bx ; clock ticks per 1/10 s add bx,dx mov [KbdTimeOut],bx jmp short parse_config_2 +; DTM BEGIN ------------------------------------------------ +pc_showtimeout: call getint ; &...

...5: In file included from /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/Support/SourceMgr.h:20: In file included from /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/PointerUnion.h:18: /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/PointerIntPair.h:60:50: error: no member named 'getInt' in 'llvm::PointerIntPairInfo<void *, 2, llvm::pointer_union_detail::PointerUnionUIntTraits<std::__debug::vector<unsigned char, std::allocator<unsigned char> > *, std::__debug::vector<unsigned short, std::allocator<unsigned short> > *, std::__debug::vector<u...

...ad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/Support/SourceMgr.h:20: >> In file included from >> /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/PointerUnion.h:18: >> /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/PointerIntPair.h:60:50: >> error: no member named 'getInt' in 'llvm::PointerIntPairInfo<void *, >> 2, llvm::pointer_union_detail::PointerUnionUIntTraits<std::__debug::vector<unsigned >> char, std::allocator<unsigned char> > *, std::__debug::vector<unsigned >> short, std::allocator<unsigned short> > *...

...vm/Support/SourceMgr.h:20: >> >> In file included from >> >> /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/PointerUnion.h:18: >> >> /home/jayfoad2/git/llvm-project/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/PointerIntPair.h:60:50: >> >> error: no member named 'getInt' in 'llvm::PointerIntPairInfo<void *, >> >> 2, llvm::pointer_union_detail::PointerUnionUIntTraits<std::__debug::vector<unsigned >> >> char, std::allocator<unsigned char> > *, std::__debug::vector<unsigned >> >> short, std::allocator&l...

...hat was passed to setAlignment, not the bit alignment from the string. // ABI alignment. if (Rest.empty()) report_fatal_error( "Missing alignment specification in datalayout string"); Split = split(Rest, ':'); unsigned ABIAlign = inBytes(getInt(Tok)); ~Craig On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:12 AM, 陳韋任 via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Would http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#langref-datalayout be help? > > - chenwj > > 2017-05-22 23:26 GMT+08:00 Dr. ERDI Gergo via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llv...

On 04/04/2018 11:15, David Chisnall wrote: > On 4 Apr 2018, at 11:01, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 04/04/2018 05:34, Riyaz Puthiyapurayil via llvm-dev wrote: >>> llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, signed> P; >>> P.setInt(-4); >>> Ideally, the value range for a 3-bit signed integer

On Mon, 22 May 2017, Dr. ERDI Gergo wrote: > Actually, tracking down the sequence of function calls, it turns out that '8' > is ultimately coming from the following call in DataLayout::getAlignment: > > getAlignmentInfo(AGGREGATE_ALIGN, 0, abi_or_pref, Ty); > > this seems to return 8 with the following datalayout string: > >

On 4 Apr 2018, at 11:01, Florian Hahn via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 04/04/2018 05:34, Riyaz Puthiyapurayil via llvm-dev wrote: >> llvm::PointerIntPair<double*, 3, signed> P; >> P.setInt(-4); >> Ideally, the value range for a 3-bit signed integer should be [-4,3]. But the above call to setInt will fail. Essentially, the

...pc_kernel64: cmp word [VKernelCtr],byte 0 + je .err ; ("label" section only) + cmp word [CpuIs64], 0 + je .err ; Ignore if kernel cpu is 32bit + call pc_getline + mov di,VKernelBuf+vk_rname + call mangle_name +.err: ret + +; ; "timeout" command ; pc_timeout: call getint diff -u syslinux-2.11/pxelinux.asm syslinux-2.11.new/pxelinux.asm --- syslinux-2.11/pxelinux.asm 2004-08-04 00:16:53.000000000 -0600 +++ syslinux-2.11.new/pxelinux.asm 2004-10-04 17:33:56.000000000 -0600 @@ -304,6 +304,7 @@ command_line resb max_cmd_len+2 ; Command line buffer alignb 4 default...

...t Java has this "private" but-not-really-in-practice API called sun.misc.Unsafe that can be used to access native memory. So you can have (I'm paraphrasing, the method names may not match): long addr = unsafe.allocateMemory() unsafe.putInt(addr + 48, 9001); int val = unsafe.getInt(addr + 48); etc. You may even get decent performance out of this since JIT compilers tend to have to optimize these well (they're commonly uses in the implementation of some popular JDK classes). But you're right that it will still be difficult to naively inter-operate between Java and C...

My idea was to create a complete backend treating Java as a normal platform, to enable LLVM to compile programs to Java Bytecode (.class) and Java Archive files (.jar). This could be useful in situations where we need to compile a program for a platform still not natively supported by LLVM. I don't know if it exists already, I've heard about this "LLJVM" but I don't think it

...ent istream::ignore. msvcirt: Implement istream::peek. msvcirt: Implement istream::putback. msvcirt: Implement istream::read. msvcirt: Implement istream::seekg. msvcirt: Implement istream::sync. msvcirt: Implement istream::tellg. msvcirt: Implement istream::getint. msvcirt: Implement istream::getdouble. msvcirt: Implement istream::ws. Jacek Caban (15): gdi32: Make CreateDIBSection hotpatchable. kernel32: Make MapViewOfFile and VirtualAlloc hotpatchable. mshtml/tests: Use relative URLs in navigation.js. mshtml: Use bind_to...