search for: overflowing

Hello, I've got samba 2.2.6 running on my internal network. I'm trying to connect to my home directory via a win2ksp3 client, and i'm getting the below error message in my satellite.log file which is the log file created when i tried to connect. Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks. Dave. ERROR: string overflow by 4 in string_sub(%u, 7) [2002/10/28 22:03:22, 0]

# Hi, # This plot has two colors. overflow <- read.csv('http://chainsaw.thomaslevine.com/overflow.csv', stringsAsFactors = F) png('original.png') stripchart(overflow$precipi ~ overflow$after.9.am, method='stack', pch = 22, bg = overflow$overflow + 1, vertical = T, col = 0) dev.off() # I wanted continuous bands of color, so I sorted the data frame. # But after

...or the purpose of optimizations, can we assume that functions do not overflow? That is, is stack overflow is undefined behavior? 4b. If not undefined behavior, can we assume that if a stack overflow occurs, the program will be terminated? This would e.g. stop side-effect code to be moved before the overflowing call; otherwise it would be executed on overflow termination. How would we check whether a function can overflow the stack? Whatever the answers to these questions are, I think we should clarify what the function attributes noreturn, nounwind, willreturn mean. The most explicit way would be listin...

On Aug 22, 2008, at 9:34 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > C has a way to express this: signed integers are defined to never > overflow, unsigned integers are defined to wrap gracefully on > overflow. And gcc has yet more fun in it: -fstrict-overflow Allow the compiler to assume strict signed overflow rules, depending on the language being compiled. For C

libswfdec/swfdec_as_context.c | 2 +- libswfdec/swfdec_movie.c | 2 +- test/trace/Makefile.am | 15 +++++++++++++++ test/trace/crash-0.5.4-13491-stack-overflow-5.swf |binary test/trace/crash-0.5.4-13491-stack-overflow-5.swf.trace | 1 + test/trace/crash-0.5.4-13491-stack-overflow-6.swf

CGP also relies on the add being a simple two's complement add, since it will transform define void @test1(i64 %a, i64 %b, i64* %res_i64, i1* %res_i1) { entry: %add = add i64 %b, %a %cmp = icmp ult i64 %add, %a store i1 %cmp, i1* %res_i1 store i64 %add, i64* %res_i64 ret void } to define void @test1(i64 %a, i64 %b, i64* %res_i64, i1* %res_i1) { entry: %uadd.overflow = call

Hi Michael, Please keep in mind non-C/C++ frontends. For example, in Rust, we promise to avoid all undefined behavior in safe code. There is no reasonable compositional analysis that can statically detect stack overflows (I know safety-critical systems are subjected such analyses, but those could not reasonably be enforced on all Rust code -- most of them just forbid recursion, for example), so

Hello, I run samba 3.0.4 on a RHL9 server. Samba is a domain member of a W2k3 ADS and I use CUPS as printing mechanism; therefore Samba is compiled with Kerberos 1.3.1-7 and cups-devel. 3.0.4 runs pretty good, printing via CUPS runs well too, only the following messages I see constantly (this flooding my logs) while using 3.0.4: winbindd.log ========= [2004/07/27 16:07:04, 1]

Several instruction set architectures include arithmetic operations that can trap on overflow, or support this feature with a separate trap-on-overflow-flag instruction (such as the x86 INTO instruction). I am adding a back-end to the Open Dylan compiler to generate LLVM IR. The original back-end, which generates x86 machine code, makes use of the INTO instruction, and the runtime turns the

On Aug 22, 2008, at 9:30 AM, Vikram S. Adve wrote: > In the general case, I think you have to be conservative about this > because programmers may deliberately want this kind of "wraparound" > behavior, e.g., with periodic boundary conditions. But 99.9% of > programs probably don't need that so it would be bad to penalize them > for this corner case. In such a

In the latest 3.1 I get this in our backup: filename overflows max-path len by 1: <path> filename overflows max-path len by 1: <path> filename overflows max-path len by 9: <path> filename overflows max-path len by 7: <path> filename overflows max-path len by 4: <path> filename overflows max-path len by 5: <path> filename overflows max-path len by 6:

On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Peter S. Housel wrote: > Several instruction set architectures include arithmetic operations that can trap on overflow, or support this feature with a separate trap-on-overflow-flag instruction (such as the x86 INTO instruction). > > > I am adding a back-end to the Open Dylan compiler to generate LLVM IR. The original back-end, which generates x86

Hi, I've got a problem with a 2.2.2 samba server. It has, a number of times, recorded the following lines for a short period of time of 10 seconds, and then not again for days. Has anyone seen these before? It all appears to be random characters. It has only happened from 2 machines out of 30 or so. [2005/01/13 09:33:29, 0] lib/util_str.c:safe_strcpy(877) ERROR: string overflow by 363 in

Hi Pete, > Or do you mean that the result of an add may not even be defined? In that case would reading it be considered UB in the case where the overflow bit was set? Yeah, this is the case I'm worried about: that for example sadd.with.overflow(INT_MAX, 1) might be designed to return { poison, true } instead of giving a useful result in the first element of the struct. John

What is the cause for such a message while running kernel 2.6.1 on RH9 ? Neighbour table overflow. NET: 282 messages suppressed. Neighbour table overflow. Alex Iruc _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/

We have code that processes a buffer in the forward or backwards direction. It looks similar to the following (https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/blob/master/adv-simd.h#L1138): uint8_t * ptr = ... size_t len = ... size_t inc = 16; if (flags & REVERSE_DIRECTION) { ptr += len - inc; inc = 0-inc; } while (len > 16) { // process blocks ptr += inc; len -= 16; } Clang

After chatting on IRC, Peter wants a very specific interrupt (int4 on x86). I suggested he add a new llvm.x86.int(i32) intrinsic, and use the existing branch on llvm.sadd.with.overflow intrinsic. The x86 backend can then turn jo+int4 into into when reasonable. -Chris On Aug 9, 2010, at 5:45 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > > On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Peter S. Housel wrote: > >>

Thanks! This is all very interesting, and tells me that LLVM has a way to go to fully support all of these capabilities (if that is the right thing to do, which isn't clear). OTOH, it looks like a lot of real-world software that is using LLVM already doesn't seem to be affected by the lack of them. Does anyone know of any C/C++ programs that require integer overflow on signed

Do we have a .ll test cases for arithmetic overflow intrinsics that lli can execute and report any overflow occured? - sanjiv -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110505/3a62c745/attachment.html>

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Feb 8, 2009, at 5:54 PM, Paul Schlie wrote: >> Are overflow behavior tags meant to enable the specification of a >> particular instruction's required or presumed overflow behavior? > > I'm not sure what you mean. The overflow tags specify what happens if > overflow happens (defined wrapping, defined saturating, or undefined > behavior),