search for: html__

On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, trix at redhat.com wrote: > > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://clang.llvm.org/docs/DiagnosticsReference.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!Krxz78O3RKcB9JBMVo_F98FupVhj_jxX60ddN6tKGEbv_cnooXc1nnBmchm-e_O9ieGnyQ$ > > Please get your IT department to remove that stupidity. If you > can't, please send email from a non-Red Hat email address. Actually, the problem is at Oracle's end somewhere in the ocfs2...

...lures in GWPAsan(!) to the fact > that the new pass manager doesn't properly skip passes like the old pass > manager. For example, when a function is marked optnone, or when using > https://llvm.org/docs/OptBisect.html > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/llvm.org/docs/OptBisect.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!t3zrtZFFWm0ifdWgL9SiWSNETodW3pMSJ8m8YWqK139cicFp_U1juO0D90-VinpUWg$> > . > > > > Lots of passes (e.g. SROA) will do the following under the legacy pass > manager: > > > > bool runOnFunction(Function &F) override { > if (skipFunction(F...

...on-review - oh, > > Alexey > > >> wrote a > > >> > > >> > good summary with links to other discussions here: > > >> > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > > dev/2019-September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!sRjL4Vdx9oC8TPFhKZ- > > QbL7LtpIL-1Zdb4OydT2xVhpDTRyUixtaozLYiey_aMV0lQ$ > > >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > > dev/2019- > > September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!r2Jqc2yEgxrb2QcQEocDHJBizj0KUKE > &gt...

...- oh, Alexey >> wrote a >> >> > good summary with links to other discussions here: >> >> > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135068.html >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!r2Jqc2yEgxrb2QcQEocDHJBizj0KUKE70_57b4_rsj1TN0qB8NpBvVKtY638NIRu2g$> >> ) >> >> > Thoughts? >> >> >> >> I think for the problem of "zero length functions and .debug_ranges" >> binutils approach looks good: >>...

...> > >> > > > > >> > good summary with links to other discussions here: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > > > > dev/2019- > > September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!sRjL4Vdx9oC8TPFhKZ- > > > > QbL7LtpIL-1Zdb4OydT2xVhpDTRyUixtaozLYiey_aMV0lQ$ > > > > >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > > > > dev/2019- > > > > > > September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZG...

...#39;ve spawned a separate broader discussion/non-review - oh, Alexey wrote a > good summary with links to other discussions here: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135068.html<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!r2Jqc2yEgxrb2QcQEocDHJBizj0KUKE70_57b4_rsj1TN0qB8NpBvVKtY638NIRu2g$> ) > Thoughts? I think for the problem of "zero length functions and .debug_ranges" binutils approach looks good: >Special cases only debug_ranges, resolving all relocations to >dead code...

...t; > good summary with links to other discussions here: > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > >> > > > dev/2019- > >> > September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!sRjL4Vdx9oC8TPFhKZ- > >> > > > QbL7LtpIL-1Zdb4OydT2xVhpDTRyUixtaozLYiey_aMV0lQ$ > >> > > > >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > >> > > > dev/2019- > >> > > > > &g...

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 7:11 AM Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > When the optnone design was being discussed, Chandler specifically > rejected having the pass manager involved in the decision (which was the > original proposed design). Assuming he still feels the same way now, if > the existing `skipFunction` calls aren’t being executed under the new pass >

...BSCRIBE and more, see > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtL8RrekaA$ > PLEASE do read the posting guide https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtKGvEhDNw$ > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...nd more, seehttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help__;!!KwNVnqRv!GkOclaf0NPpoVxF8zs_a2pCGlBelsouhJKKR4wG4cG_gEycZ6t-N6nbPvxD1AxnYureFFthr_Nc-zXCU0czR4zGIstg$ >> PLEASE do read the posting guide https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html__;!!KwNVnqRv!GkOclaf0NPpoVxF8zs_a2pCGlBelsouhJKKR4wG4cG_gEycZ6t-N6nbPvxD1AxnYureFFthr_Nc-zXCU0czRLvLqcYM$ >> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, trix at redhat.com wrote: > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://clang.llvm.org/docs/DiagnosticsReference.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!Krxz78O3RKcB9JBMVo_F98FupVhj_jxX60ddN6tKGEbv_cnooXc1nnBmchm-e_O9ieGnyQ$ Please get your IT department to remove that stupidity. If you can't, please send email from a non-Red Hat email address. I don't understand why this is a useful warning to fix. What actual problem i...

...rote: > On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 19:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 09:09:28AM -0700, trix at redhat.com wrote: > > > clang has a number of useful, new warnings see > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://clang.llvm.org/docs/DiagnosticsReference.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!Krxz78O3RKcB9JBMVo_F98FupVhj_jxX60ddN6tKGEbv_cnooXc1nnBmchm-e_O9ieGnyQ$ > > > > Please get your IT department to remove that stupidity. If you > > can't, please send email from a non-Red Hat email address. > > Actually, the problem is at Oracle's e...

...ussions here: > >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > > >> >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > >> >> > > > dev/2019- > >> >> > September/135068.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!sRjL4Vdx9oC8TPFhKZ- > >> >> > > > QbL7LtpIL-1Zdb4OydT2xVhpDTRyUixtaozLYiey_aMV0lQ$ > >> >> > > > >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm- > >> >> > > > dev/2019- > >...

Mapping between Windows DACLs and Posix user-group-other file permissions is complex, depends on externalities, and is necessarily lossy: http://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/using-filemodes.html http://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/ntsec.html While there's a lot of information at those links, they don't completely explain how the mapping works. (And who knows if GnuWin32 does the mapping

Hi Scott, It's possible they've missed it, so I've explicitly CC'ed a number of the usual DWARF suspects, at least some of whom are on the standards committee. I don't have anything specific to add myself. James On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 15:25, via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I don't know what an acceptable ping rate on an RFC is, but I also

Another thing to consider about your feature idea is that the output may be noisy depending on what you were hoping for. SLH tries to mitigate anything that could potentially be a problem and thus it instruments almost every branch, load, and function entry, for example. There isn't a lot of signal about what is really a gadget among the code instrumented by SLH. It really tries to be

Hello, I have a data frame like this: d11=suppressWarnings(read.csv("/Users/anamaria/Downloads/B1.csv", stringsAsFactors=FALSE, header=TRUE)) > d11 X Domain.decomp. DD.com..load Neighbor.search Launch.PP.GPU.ops. Comm..coord. 1 SYCL 2. 1 0 3.7 0. 1 1 .6 2 CUDA 2 0 3. 1 0 1 .0

...gt; powerllvm at ca.ibm.com>; Nemanja Ivanovic <nemanjai at ca.ibm.com> > *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Flakey failure on clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage > > > > https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/lit.html > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/lit.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!pMM0AcKS3gRL1wx2OJk-DMZG6KNuO3f602ILYnDX01_Q_Se_K_tNOHEg9mWS8jKYBA$> > already lists %T as "parent directory of %t (not unique, deprecated, do not > use)". See also https://reviews.llvm.org/D35396 > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/reviews.llvm.org/D35...

...d more, see > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtL8RrekaA$ > > PLEASE do read the posting guide https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html__;!!OToaGQ!s5vzmg4dxnnS0zohDtpWBBey7cb53uSXIPTTqs5fgaz-BKlNnWzpCfBz6aP0YhCGemy-bP6xEtKGvEhDNw$ > > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. > > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > ______________________________________________ > R-help...

https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/lit.html already lists %T as "parent directory of %t (not unique, deprecated, do not use)". See also https://reviews.llvm.org/D35396 On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 3:37 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I think I'd be up for considering deprecation of %T due to the risk > of race conditions/conflicts between tests. %t