search for: possily

...s. I'm not referring to things like instcombine that have individual rules that guard transformations and the pass iterates applying transformations when rules are matched. That's straightforward to instrument. The harder cases are where the analysis phase itself does some transformation (possily to facilitate analysis) and then decides the larger-goal transformation is not viable. If the pass then tries to undo the first transformation, it's possible that -pass-max will result in code that never would have been generated, because it could do the first transformation but then not undo...

...rate runs to isolate the problem. I'd like to start building this off the pass instrumentation stuff as soon as it gets integrated. Could you copy me on Phabricator when they land there? Thanks! >> The harder cases are where the analysis phase itself does some >> transformation (possily to facilitate analysis) and then decides the > As Philip has already pointed out, analyses by design are expected to > be non-mutating. See my reply to Philip. I'm talking about various analyses that happen within transformation passes. -David

...ion, doesn't the user's SID get lost and then recreated differently? What happens if I change the users SID numbers? Doesn't this make an horrible mess on the workstations that already know the domain users by the old SIDs? Any help (even in suggesting to read more of TFM, and possily a link to the part of the manual that I have to read) is really appreciated. -- Fabio "Kurgan" Muzzi

...o start building this off the pass instrumentation stuff as > soon as it gets integrated.  Could you copy me on Phabricator when > they > land there?  Thanks! > > >> The harder cases are where the analysis phase itself does some > >> transformation (possily to facilitate analysis) and then > decides the > > As Philip has already pointed out, analyses by design are > expected to > > be non-mutating. > > See my reply to Philip.  I'm talking about various analyses that > happen > within transf...

...that the fix has solved the problem. This is a dilemma for people that wants to use Asterisk in production. We have the following menu: * RPMs and Tarballs - these are the releases, really, at this point old, includes the audio bug * CVS stable - with the audio bug * CVS head - with new code, possily some unknown bugs I have no answer to this, only that there's a lot of internal discussion going on and hopefully we'll see some action in the following week. Please note that the "stable" cvs was *aiming* for a stable release, but has not been the actual base for any new release...

I was going to write something up about fine-grained opt-bisect but didn't get to it last week. We've had a -pass-max option here for some time and have hand-added instrumentation to various passes to honor it. It's saved us man-years of debug time. I was planning on sending it upstream but saw this effort with pass execution instrumentation and thought it might fit there.