search for: o5s

After updating linux kernel from 2.6.26 to 2.6.30 on Debian GNU/Linux testing amd64 (kernel from repositaries) Wine doesn't work. Neither 1.1.27 (development), nor 1.0.1 (stable). It can't open object files -- there are no such object files. $ winecfg err:module:load_builtin_dll failed to load .so lib for builtin L"winex11.drv": libuuid.so.1: =52>7<>6=> >B:@KBL

Hi all, I attempted to add an EL5.1 client to our puppet server (EL5), and after signing the client cert, got the error "Certificates were not trusted: hostname not match with the server certificate" I found the mailing list discussion and the relevant page: http://www.reductivelabs.com/trac/puppet/wiki/RubySSL-2007-006 As far as I can tell, my puppermaster''s cert CN matches

Let's say I have 2 bytecode files, X.bc and Y.bc that I want to combine into Z.bc. Which of the following command sequences will produce more optimized code? Sequence 1: llvm-link -o tmp.bc X.bc Y.bc opt -std-compile-opts -o Z.bc tmp.bc Sequence 2: llvm-ld -O5 -o Z.bc X.bc Y.bc Without looking at details it seems like sequence 2 should produce the most optimized code. As a follow

On Jan 7, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Venkatraman Govindaraju wrote: > When I run LLC with option "-O0 -march=sparc" on following testcase, > fast register allocator crashes with "UNREACHABLE executed" error. LLC > generates code successfully with other standard register allocators > available. I haven't investigated the Sparc backend specifically but... My guess is

Hello, i posted a question about a possible ext3fs bug a few month ago. I see this kernel-msg in the messages: Oct 8 18:30:00 o5s kernel: EXT3-fs error (device sd(8,10)) in ext3_new_inode: error 28 Oct 8 18:35:00 o5s kernel: EXT3-fs error (device sd(8,10)) in ext3_new_inode: error 28 Oct 8 18:40:00 o5s kernel: EXT3-fs error (device sd(8,10)) in ext3_new_inode: error 28 they repead periodicaly, because a logging file is now...

Hello, When I run LLC with option "-O0 -march=sparc" on following testcase, fast register allocator crashes with "UNREACHABLE executed" error. LLC generates code successfully with other standard register allocators available. $ cat call.ll define void @test() nounwind { entry: %0 = tail call i32 (...)* @foo() nounwind tail call void (...)* @bar() nounwind ret void }

On Oct 8, 2011, at 12:05 PM, Duncan Sands wrote: > PS: With -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns the LLVM optimizers are run at > the following levels: > > Command line option LLVM optimizers run at > ------------------- ---------------------- > -O1 tiny amount of optimization > -O2 or -O3 -O1 > -O4 or -O5

I tried llvm-gcc -c test.c llvm-gcc test.o llc -march=c test.bc -f -o test2.c Then I compiled both test.c and test2.c with sdcc, a compiler which lacks high-level optimization. The code generated from test2.c was bigger. Then I tried llvm-gcc -O5 -Os -c test.c llvm-gcc -O5 -Os test.o llc -march=c test.bc -f -o test2.c But it generated exactly the same code as the commands above. What is it that

Hi Chris, >> PS: With -fplugin-arg-dragonegg-enable-gcc-optzns the LLVM optimizers are run at >> the following levels: >> >> Command line option LLVM optimizers run at >> ------------------- ---------------------- >> -O1 tiny amount of optimization >> -O2 or -O3 -O1 >> -O4 or -O5

I am using LLVM via the Adobe Alchemy project. I'm trying to upgrade LLVM within Alchemy (its v2.1 of opt is crashing), but am running into an issue with llvm-ld. Alchemy is passing -O5 to llvm-ld, but it seems that -O params are no longer accepted by llvm-ld v2.4+ ("llvm-ld: Unknown command line argument '-O5'. Try: 'llvm-ld --help'"). Are -O optimizations

Dear R-users I analysed the same data set by two different ways; analysis of covariance by using lm and anova functions and multiple comparison by using simtest function in the multcomp library. The output from the analysis of covariance is; > y<-lm(D~Cond+Q1,data=x) > anova(y) Analysis of Variance Table Response: D Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) Cond 2

I have been wondering why llvm-ld generates the same code with or without the option "-O5" so I looked at its source (llvm 2.2). And apparently, the options "-On" are accepted but never used! The program runs a fixed set of optimization passes, unless "-disable-opt" is specified. What is the reason for this? If this is intended, then the documentation should say

I'm linking a program (my ellsif driver) that basically brings in most of the LLVM stuff: bitcode reading, optimizations, linking, and target code generation. All of a sudden, I'm getting the following when I run: [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i test/sieve.i -time-actions -O5 <premain>: CommandLine Error: Argument 'machine-licm' defined more than once!

Dear Developers, motivated by the new Sun Studio checks I compiled R-devel and several of our packages with Sun Studio 12 on Fedora x64. Everything worked fine and R-devel runs, with the exception of package Matrix where compilation crashes with the following message. The error occurs during building of the recommended packages and also if Matrix is compiled separately: [...] CC -G -lCstd

Hi folks, I've got an idea for something I may be able to do as a Link-Time- Optimization pass, but I can't seem to find how LTO gets used. My crude approach has been to compile LLVM for debugging, and then run gdb on llvm-ld with -O5 and two .bc files, trying to catch LTO in action. I've also scanned the compiled tools, and none of them appear to use the symbol

Hello, In order to solve that problem of sorting numerics made characters there is package stringr, functions str_sort and str_order. library(stringr) set.seed(2447) x <- sample(11L) sort(as.character(x)) [1] "1" "10" "11" "2" "3" "4" "5" "6" "7" "8" "9"

Thanks, for the explanation. Still, I think this is surprising bahaviour which might be handled better. Best, Peter Am 20.10.2017 9:49 nachm. schrieb "I?aki ?car" <i.ucar86 at gmail.com>: > Hi Peter, > > 2017-10-20 21:33 GMT+02:00 Peter Meissner <retep.meissner at gmail.com>: > > Hey, > > > > I found this - for me - quite surprising and puzzling

Folks, I'm at the point in developing llvmc (Compiler Driver) where I need to get the details on the specific optimization arguments that the -O family of options should (by default) issue to "opt". I'm soliciting your feedback on this so I can start testing optimization. Hopefully you can provide it by early this coming week. For clarity, the -O options are currently defined

I am compiling R-0.90.0 on alpha-dec-osf4.0 and it stops by giving the following message: cc: Error: ../../../R/src/main/gram.y, line 1365: In this declaration, parameter 1 has a different type than specified in an earlier declaration of this function. SEXP mkString(const char *s) -----^ cc: Error: ../../../R/src/main/gram.y, line 1365: In this declaration, the type of "mkString" is not

I am compiling R-0.90.0 on alpha-dec-osf4.0 and it stops by giving the following message: cc: Error: ../../../R/src/main/gram.y, line 1365: In this declaration, parameter 1 has a different type than specified in an earlier declaration of this function. SEXP mkString(const char *s) -----^ cc: Error: ../../../R/src/main/gram.y, line 1365: In this declaration, the type of "mkString" is not