search for: mircea

Hi, This is my MySQL table: <snip> mysql> select username, password from mailbox; +----------+----------+ | username | password | +----------+----------+ | mircea | stefan | +----------+----------+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) </snip> When I try to login (pop3) I recive "-ERR Authentication failed." <snip> +OK Dovecot ready. user mircea +OK pass stefan -ERR Authentication failed. </snip> maillog: <snip> Dec 27 20:54:38 plu...

...tives, how about: - we make the flag an enum: true, false, and auto_inserted - we use -allow-unused-prefixes=auto_inserted for the scripts This allows easy identification, and should be easier to script without requiring more significant test by test surgery. WDYT? On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 7:13 AM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > Oh! Perfect - thanks! > > (plus, if it becomes unsupported, there's another nudge to fix :) ) > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 7:05 AM James Henderson < > jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk> wrote: > >> I recently discovered...

...to the casual reader (why might not've seen this discussion > or seen the flag before) that this was added automatically and there's > a good chance the use of this feature is probably more likely than not > unintentional/in need of cleanup. > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:48 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > > > > My preference would be to go with the tri-value option - I think the > downside of folks needing to write a value after "-allow-unused-prefixes" > is not that terrible; if folks feel that using true/false/auto is weird,...

...I'd argue that the value here is getting to the place where the default is right (so we stop the bleeding), and where the scripted cleanup can be easily audited subsequently. On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:22 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:06 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:18 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev > >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org&g...

...e > prefix is intentionally unused, so you might even be able to skip the FIXME > annotation and just do the right thing. > That's what I'm trying to avoid - there are about 30 or so such cases. What's the negative to the flag-based ideas? > On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 18:18, Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > >> There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have >> output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example, >> they check debug info. Adding // FIXME: comments shift that. >> >&g...

On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:18 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have > output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example, > they check debug info. Adding // FIXME: comments shift...

...p. The latter doesn't have a MachineMemOperand. Is the latter technically a bug, maybe, and it so happens nothing is hindered by the absence of the MachineMemOperand, so we're not observing it? Added Elena, based on commit log in X86ISelLowering.cpp, perhaps she has more context. Thanks! Mircea On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 2:09 PM Francis Visoiu Mistrih <francisvm at yahoo.com> wrote: > Hello Mircea, > > > On 8 Mar 2018, at 18:52, Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I'm trying to under...

On 03/05/2015 06:16 PM, Mircea Trofin wrote: > Thanks! > > Philip, do you mean I should transform the original IR to something > like this? Yes. > (...which is what -expand-struct-regs can do, when applied to my > original input) Sorry, what? This doesn't appear to be a pass in ToT. Are you using an o...

errata: I am on 3.6 full stop. I *thought* there was a 3.7 available, based on the title of http://llvm.org/docs/ ("LLVM 3.7 documentation"). I suppose the docs are ahead of the release schedule? On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 9:44 AM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > Sorry, that phase is part of the PNaCl toolchain. This would be LLVM 3.6, > would your comments still apply? > > I tried -O3 to no avail. I suppose I'll get llvm 3.7, see if I can > optimize the latest snippet there (the one avoiding...

...omment # CHECK: check something # RUN: --option2 And you'd end up with "some command --option1 --option2" being run. It's rather surprising behaviour, and not one I'd generally recommend exercising, but maybe in this context it would be okay? On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 15:00, Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 2:22 AM James Henderson < > jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk> wrote: > >> I think it would make more sense to add it at each individual call site. >> This ensures that all cases are fixed, rath...

..._enc_ctx handle and repeatedly call th_encode_flushheader(). Do I have to save this header packets? Do i have to provide this header packets to the decoder when I initialize it? Because the documentation says /Parse the header packets by repeatedly calling th_decode_headerin(). Thank you,/ -- Mircea Gliga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/attachments/20091125/5c95eb4f/attachment.htm

Could this issue also be related to an “AphrontQueryException #1030: Got error 28 from storage engine” error when browsing Phabricator? ~ Todd Snider From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Hubert Tong via llvm-dev Sent: Friday, May 1, 2020 9:15 AM To: Mircea Trofin Cc: Nicolai Hähnle via llvm-dev Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [llvm-dev] arc diff says "disk is full"? It's still down. On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:49 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: Hello, I'm seein...

...splacement, Segment. The former, if I understand it correctly, is used to hold a relationship back to IR load/store instructions. Is it possible to have a X86 MachineInstr with a memory operand (i.e. X86II::getMemoryOperandNo >=0), that has no MachineMemOperand? What about the reverse? Thanks, Mircea. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180308/e27ca0e4/attachment.html>

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 11:36 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:46 AM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:40 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 7:30 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm...

...ories before adding --allow-unused-prefixes=something to clutter up git log/blame and I feel that they haven't been made aware of the FileCheck change. (I CCed some folks for these directories https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-November/146419.html ) On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:58 PM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > how about -allow-unused-prefixes=needs_review > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I don't feel too strongly about the "=true" bit for legit...

...sense to add it at each individual call site. This ensures that all cases are fixed, rather than just one in a file. It also ensures that in the (hopefully unlikely) event that there are both intentional and unintentional use-cases within a file, each one gets checked. On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 20:29, Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Thanks! > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 11:50 AM Fāng-ruì Sòng <maskray at google.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 11:36 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >&...

...ghlights/makes it clear to the casual reader (why might not've seen this discussion or seen the flag before) that this was added automatically and there's a good chance the use of this feature is probably more likely than not unintentional/in need of cleanup. On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:48 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > > My preference would be to go with the tri-value option - I think the downside of folks needing to write a value after "-allow-unused-prefixes" is not that terrible; if folks feel that using true/false/auto is weird, how about "all...

Hello Mircea, > On 8 Mar 2018, at 18:52, Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm trying to understand the relationship between MachineMemOperand and, on X86, memory operands of machine instructions. The latter seem to be operands held in orde...

On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:06 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:18 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> > >> &g...

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:40 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 7:30 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> There are currently 1350 owner-less failures in the spreadsheet >> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o6q3XH1n3DDyyccnYZ_kVfhFbTDzC_S09e973_cwYuw/edit#gid=0>. >> These seem to be the larger are...