search for: passoption

....000000000 +0800 @@ -1475,7 +1475,7 @@ want:</p> <pre> -(gdb) <b>break PassManager::run</b> +(gdb) <b>break llvm::PassManager::run</b> Breakpoint 1 at 0x2413bc: file Pass.cpp, line 70. (gdb) <b>run test.bc -load $(LLVMTOP)/llvm/Debug/lib/[libname].so -[passoption]</b> Starting program: opt test.bc -load $(LLVMTOP)/llvm/Debug/lib/[libname].so -[passoption]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Bram Adams wrote: > > A limitation here is that only Functions' debug data can be kept, as > other Values (i.e. Instructions) are not Annotable. Is this an explicit > design decision? Yes, we intentionally do not want things to be annotatable. In fact, Function being annotatable is a wart due to the way the code generator currently works. In general, we

Hi, Chris Lattner wrote: > I'd suggest writing a little pass that strips out debug intrinsics. > OK, I did this and it works (the strange seg fault also disappears after all declared debug variables are gone)! In a first phase, all intrinsic instructions are discarded after extracting their data into annotations attached to the relevant Function. Then, a second phase wipes out the

The included patch adds a new option to the ssh client: -d fd Read the password from file descriptor fd. If you use 0 for fd, the passphrase will be read from stdin. This is basically the same as GPG:s parameter --passphrase-fd. Flames about why this is a bad idea goes into /dev/null. I really need to do this. There are lots of ugly Expect-hacks out there, but I want a more clean