search for: index0

...is: *Assume pInst is *%1 = load double* %arrayidx1, align 4, !tbaa !0 Value *loadValue = pInst->getOperand(0); Type *vecTy = VectorType::get(Type::getDoublePtrTy(currF->getContext()), 2); Value *emptyVec = UndefValue::get(vecTy); Type* u32Ty = Type::getInt32Ty(currF->getContext()); Value *index0 = ConstantInt::get(u32Ty, 0); Value *index1 = ConstantInt::get(u32Ty, 1); Instruction *InsertVal = InsertElementInst::Create(emptyVec, loadValue, index0, ""); InsertVal = InsertElementInst::Create(emptyVec, loadValue, index1, ""); InsertVal->insertBefore(pInst); It turned...

...ux's free is null resilient */ - free(iter->data); -} - -/* pi_ctor() - common/raw iterator initialization */ -static int pi_ctor(struct part_iter *iter, - const struct disk_info *di, int flags -) -{ - memcpy(&iter->di, di, sizeof *di); - iter->flags = flags; - iter->index0 = -1; - iter->length = di->lbacnt; - - iter->type = typeraw; - return 0; -} - -/* pi_dos_ctor() - MBR/EBR iterator specific initialization */ -static int pi_dos_ctor(struct part_iter *iter, - const struct disk_info *di, int flags, - const struct disk_dos_mbr *mbr -) -{ - if (pi...

...ux's free is null resilient */ - free(iter->data); -} - -/* pi_ctor() - common/raw iterator initialization */ -static int pi_ctor(struct part_iter *iter, - const struct disk_info *di, int flags -) -{ - memcpy(&iter->di, di, sizeof *di); - iter->flags = flags; - iter->index0 = -1; - iter->length = di->lbacnt; - - iter->type = typeraw; - return 0; -} - -/* pi_dos_ctor() - MBR/EBR iterator specific initialization */ -static int pi_dos_ctor(struct part_iter *iter, - const struct disk_info *di, int flags, - const struct disk_dos_mbr *mbr -) -{ - if (pi...

This is a bit updated set of chain.c32 changes that simplifies a few things (and in partiter part), fixes few minor issues and adds a few new features. Details are in the following commits, below is the summary and pull details at the end. Shao - any chance to peek over them ? Most of those are relatively simple changes and well tested, though of course something might have slipped my attention.

1) code split and move Iterator related functionality is yanked from chain.c and moved to iterator.{c,h}. Both are moved to com32/chain and this way chain.c is ready for further splitting. Alternatively, partiter could be moved to com32/lib at any time in the future. It's potentially useful for other modules (e.g. if someone wanted to code partition dumper or editor). 2) Iterator updates

Hello everybody, What I am trying to do is to create a vector <4 x i32> and save some values to initialize the vector. However, I am using the insertElementInst() and the errors I get are the following; error: within this context Instruction *Insert = new InsertElementInst(instr, emptyVec, index0, "test"); and error: ‘llvm::InsertElementInst::InsertElementInst(llvm::Value*, llvm::Value*, llvm::Value*, const llvm::Twine&, llvm::Instruction*)’ is private The code I have used is the following: Type *Instr_vector = VectorType::get(Int32, 4); Value *emptyVec = UndefValue::get(Inst...

https://cran.r-project.org/package=index0 On Sun, Apr 21, 2024, 3:56 AM Hans W <hwborchers at gmail.com> wrote: > As we all know, in R indices for vectors start with 1, i.e, x[0] is not a > correct expression. Some algorithms, e.g. in graph theory or combinatorics, > are much easier to formulate and code if 0 is an allowed...

...= extractelement <3 x i32> undef, i32 %35 ... store i32 %extract4, i32* %46, align 4 The output of my program is different that the expected one, like the extractelement takes an undefined value. The instructions I used are: Instruction *Insert0 = InsertElementInst::Create(vector, Or_set, index0, "ins or"); .. Instruction *extract = ExtractElementInst::Create(vector, ch, "extract"); //where ch takes a value from 0 to 2 instr->replaceAllUsesWith(extract); //where I want to replace the instr instruction with the instruction from the vector. I am new in the LLVM and...

So last week I was wondering if XFS was still working -- even with its last on-disk structure changes -- and it _suprisingly_ worked as expected. Right, now I can finally get rid of GRUB and use Syslinux to boot my Linux on EFI from a rootfs with xfs. Shit, I have two partitions (the first one being the required ESP) so there is no way to access the other partitions since because Syslinux does not

...tion and see what wrong with it? Thanks for your time again. Value *vecVal = NULL; IRBuilder<> builder(&*pInst); Type *vecTy = VectorType::get(Type::getDoubleTy(ctxt), 2); Value *emptyVec = UndefValue::get(vecTy); Type* u32Ty = Type::getInt32Ty(currF->getContext()); Value *index0 = ConstantInt::get(u32Ty, 0); Value *index1 = ConstantInt::get(u32Ty, 1); Instruction *InsertVal = InsertElementInst::Create(emptyVec, oprnd, index0, "insert"); InsertVal = InsertElementInst::Create(emptyVec, oprnd, index1, "insert"); vecVal = builder.CreateFAdd(e...

...r 1: > index_0 = 8 index_1 = 12 > index_0 = 9 index_1 = 13 > index_0 = 10 index_1 = 14 > index_0 = 11 index_1 = 15 The SLP-vectorizer detects 8 stores, but it can’t prove that they are consecutive, so it moves on. Can you simplify the address expression ? Can you write " index0 = i*8 + 0 “ and give it a try ? > > For completeness, here the code: > > void bar(std::uint64_t start, std::uint64_t end, float * __restrict__ c, float * __restrict__ a, float * __restrict__ b) > { > const std::uint64_t inner = 4; > for (std::uint64_t i = start ; i < e...

...12 >> index_0 = 9 index_1 = 13 >> index_0 = 10 index_1 = 14 >> index_0 = 11 index_1 = 15 > > The SLP-vectorizer detects 8 stores, but it can’t prove that they are > consecutive, so it moves on. Can you simplify the address expression > ? Can you write " index0 = i*8 + 0 “ and give it a try ? > >> >> For completeness, here the code: >> >> void bar(std::uint64_t start, std::uint64_t end, float * __restrict__ >> c, float * __restrict__ a, float * __restrict__ b) >> { >> const std::uint64_t inner = 4; >>...

...*index, char **res) { - if (atom_equals (term, "true")) - return 1; + size_t size; + + if (decode_binary (buff, index, res, &size) != 0) return -1; + + (*res)[size] = 0; + + return 0; +} + +int +decode_binary (const char *buff, int *index, char **res, size_t *size) +{ + int index0; + int size0; + char *r; + + index0 = *index; + if (ei_decode_iodata (buff, index, &size0, NULL) != 0) return -1; + + r = malloc (size0+1); // In case if it's called from decode_string () + if (r == NULL) + error (EXIT_FAILURE, errno, "malloc"); + + *index = index0; + i...

rly there would be a heavy penalty to launching a shell so you would want t= o carefully evaluate the frequency this is executed on your system.<br /> <div class=3D"container"> <div class=3D"line number1 index0 alt2"><code class=3D"sql plain"><br /> DELIMITER @@</code></div> <div class=3D"line number2 index1 alt1">&nbsp;</div> <div class=3D"line number3 index2 alt2"><code class=3D"sql keyword">CREATE<= /...

Hello, the following patches should get multidisk access working. The syntax accepted is the following: (hdx,y)/path/to/file where x is the disk number and start at 0 and the y is the partition number starting at 1. So (hd0,1) is the first partition of the first disk. the other accepted syntax is using MBR's 32 bits disk signature so for example: (mbr:0x12345678,2)/foo/bar would address

>> What needs to be done (on a high level) in order to have the auto vectorizer succeed on the test function as given erlier? > Maybe you could rewrite the loop in a way that will expose contiguous memory accesses. Is this something you could do ? > Hi Nadav, the only option I see is to unroll the loop by hand. Since the array access is consecutive over 4 loop iterations I gave it a

I got it. Thanks, Nick. So, it is back to the previous problem. If I have the following instruction: %3 = fadd double %1, double %2 I want to change it into %6 = fadd <2 x double> %4, double %5 where %4 = <double %1, double %1>, %5 = <double %2, double %2>, how can I do this? Thanks, Best On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Nick Lewycky <nicholas at mxc.ca> wrote: >

As we all know, in R indices for vectors start with 1, i.e, x[0] is not a correct expression. Some algorithms, e.g. in graph theory or combinatorics, are much easier to formulate and code if 0 is an allowed index pointing to the first element of the vector. Some programming languages, for instance Julia (where the index for normal vectors also starts with 1), provide libraries/packages that allow

Hi Frank, > We are looking at a variety of target architectures. Ultimately we aim to run on BG/Q and Intel Xeon Phi (native). However, running on those architectures with the LLVM technology is planned in some future. As a first step we would target vanilla x86 with SSE/AVX 128/256 as a proof-of-concept. Great! It should be easy to support these targets. When you said wide-vectors I assumed