search for: mi2s

My CLEC just called and asked if we will support the "MI2" protocol on our proposed T1 circuit. I think this is for CallerID name. Will the T100P support this? Thanks, Mike

Hi all, I have been working through the examples in one of the vignettes associated with the 'mlogit' package, 'Kenneth Train's exercises using the mlogit package for R.' In spite of using the code unchanged, as well as the data used in the examples, I have been unable to run a Wald test to test two models. Specifically, I have run the following command, where mc and mi2 are

Hi all, I am working on an out-of-tree target. I am wondering if it is possible to force the register allocator (and/or spiller) to not break certain instruction sequence. For example: phys_reg = MI1 vreg1 vreg 2 = MI2 phys_reg Is there a way to tell RA/spiller not to insert COPY or spill between MI1 and MI2? I am using greedy register allocator and inline spiller. -- Regards, Dongrui

Hi, The insertion of DBG_VALUE instructions for spills does not seem to be handling insert locations inside bundles well. If the spill instruction is part of a bundle, the new DBG_VALUE is inserted after it, but does not have the bundling flags set. This essentially means that if we start with a set of bundled instructions: MI1 [BundledSucc=true, BundledPred=false] MI2 [BundledSucc=false,

Hi again, Here is a small patch to fix this issue. Please note that since the problem results in broken bundles, it can result in invalid schedules for any VLIW back-ends using bundling to group instructions. Best regards Saurabh Verma From: Verma, Saurabh Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 4:14 PM To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: DBG_VALUE insertion for spills breaks bundles Hi, The

...Continued from the other email Removing the defs section We can potentially infer quite a lot of the defs section but it requires both a complicated ruleset and that tblgen spends processing time doing the inferencing. That processing time is potentially significant for large combiners and for that reason we need to be careful not to let inferencing become a burden on tblgen. My main worry

> On Nov 29, 2018, at 02:02, Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle at gmail.com> wrote: > > On 27.11.18 19:01, Daniel Sanders wrote: >> ...Continued from the other email >> _Removing the defs section_ >> We can potentially infer quite a lot of the defs section but it requires both a complicated ruleset and that tblgen spends processing time doing the inferencing. That

MI2 starts ok but when I click new game it just kinda freezes, though the music keeps playing. Any ideas? last line is: wine: Unhandled page fault on read access to 0x7f0c3400 at address 0x68615040 (thread 0034), starting debugger... Could you post your .wine/user.reg ? the DllOverrides section?

Saludo cordial para cada uno. Les pido ayuda para generar números aleatorios de una mixtura k-puntos. Sabemos que la función de distribución F es una mixtura k-puntos si es de la forma F(x) = p_1 F_1(x) + p_2 F_2(x) + … + p_k F_k(x), donde F_j es una función de distribución de probabilidad, p_j > 0 y suma(p_j) = 1, para j = 1, 2, …, k. En mi caso particular F es la suavización de la

Hi, I'd like to submit a patch to match the clang patch on the front end. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140414/103257.html The front end doesn't need this patch to work but it's still important. This is mostly based on work done by kai from redstar.de Could I get some feedback on this? I'm not sure if the emitting of the register names will effect

Hi, I saw this setup on the web .. is this looks right to you ? The security set to user level, which use linux samba local login and password. Why this needs to set workgroup = SAMBAGRP ? [global] workgroup = SAMBAGRP security = user passdb backend = tdbsam Thanks

Hello everybody,, This time i want to replicate PDC to BDC when there's is any changes on PDC, here is my conf. on /etc/openldap/slapd.conf LDAP Server master moduleload syncprov overlay syncprov syncprov-checkpoint 100 10 syncprov-sessionlog 100 LDAP Server mirror moduleload syncprov syncrepl rid=001 provider=ldap://ldap.domain.com:389 bindmethod=simple

Hi, This question relates to the undef flag in the context of sub-register def operands. 1) Firstly, the documentation (comments in the source code) says that in a sub-register def operand, the "IsUndef" flag refers to the part of the register that is not written. 2) Further, the documentation about readsReg() states that a sub-register def implicitly reads the other parts of the

In order to implement a subtle memory access optimisation during post-RA scheduling, I want to be able to determine some properties about the memory access. If I have two registers referring to memory, how can I determine if they are derived from the same base-pointer? Often LLVM will optimise to use intermediate registers holding partial displacements, for example, when a 'struct'

Hi Jakob, > New_MI_1:: Vreg1 = 0 ; Vreg1 and Vreg2 > are 32 bit virt. regs. > New_MI_2:: Vreg2 = COPY C:lo_sub_reg. > New_MI_3:: B= REG_SEQUENCE<Vreg1, hi_sub_reg, Vreg2, lo_sub_reg> ; B > is a > 64 bit virt reg. I used this approach and it worked find until I hit, what I believe is, a bug in the register coalescer. When the register

Hi Dear ! I?m practice lab File server (SAMBA with CentOS 4.6), With model SAMBA is DOMAIN members of domain 2003 server (Sharing file and authenticate with account Domain 2003). I?m configure windbind (following document userguide): cp ../samba/source/nsswitch/libnss_winbind.so /lib ln -s /lib/libnss winbind.so /lib/libnss winbind.so.2 c?u h?nh /etc/nsswitch.conf # Cau

Hi Jakob, Thanks for your reply. > > The <undef> flag goes on NewMI_1 because the virtual register B isn't live > before that instruction. > > But you probably shouldn't be doing this yourself. Your NewMI code isn't in > SSA form because B has multiple definitions. Just use a REG_SEQUENCE > instruction, and let the register allocator do the transformation

Hi Listers, This has a simple answer but it has been eluding me nonetheless. I have been building a PCA plot from scratch with the ability to plot predefined groups in different colors. This has worked fine but when I try to get a polygon drawn around each of the groups it is not recognising my colour file correctly and is only printing the first colour in the file....code is below

Hi All, I've more or less finished updating the examples to the DAG style we were talking about. Hopefully I haven't forgotten anything, there was a lot to keep track of :-). Overall, I think there's a couple places where things get a a little awkward (mainly debug info) but things generally look good to me. A Simple Example def : GICombineRule<(defs reg:$D, reg:$S),

On Jul 4, 2012, at 10:45 PM, Pranav Bhandarkar <pranavb at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi, > > This question relates to the undef flag in the context of sub-register def > operands. > > 1) Firstly, the documentation (comments in the source code) says that in a > sub-register def operand, the "IsUndef" flag refers to the part of the > register that is not