search for: precluding

Do you use the LLVM_INCLUDE_TESTS setting? If so, what for? It is documented to preclude the inclusion *unittests* in the build. What it actually does in preclude *all* LLVM testing (unit and regression), but only unittests for Clang. The Clang regression tests continue to be built and run. My preference is simply to remove it if none have an important use case. If they do, I would like to

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:32:38 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote: > Nothing precludes to accepting VIRTIO_F_RING_PACKED any more. "precludes us from accepting" > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> > --- > drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git

Hi, I built llvm-gcc and tried to use it as drop-in replacement of gcc. I attempted to build busybox with it. It choked on -std=gnu99. Reduced testcase: struct stat {}; struct stat64 {}; int fxstat(int n, int fd, struct stat *sb); int fxstat64(int n, int fd, struct stat64 *sb); extern int fstat(int fd, struct stat *buf) asm("fstat64"); extern inline int fstat(int fd, struct stat *sb)

Hi, We use CMake but don't use that setting. Cheers, James On 29 June 2012 12:40, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Do you use the LLVM_INCLUDE_TESTS setting? If so, what for? > > > It is documented to preclude the inclusion *unittests* in the build. > > What it actually does in preclude *all* LLVM testing (unit and regression), > but only

>> >> So, my two questions are: >> - How do I map the domain\administrator account to a UID other than 0. > > You don't really want to change this, it maps 'Administrator' to the > Unix 'root' user and this allows the changing of ACLs etc. > Just because the Administrator user is a non-root user does not preclude it from changing ACLs. It may

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 01:13:24PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 03:37:37PM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > Michael pointed out that the virtio-vsock draft specification does not > > address live migration and in fact currently precludes migration. > > > > Migration is fundamental so the device specification at least mustn't > >

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 01:13:24PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 03:37:37PM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > Michael pointed out that the virtio-vsock draft specification does not > > address live migration and in fact currently precludes migration. > > > > Migration is fundamental so the device specification at least mustn't > >

Michael pointed out that the virtio-vsock draft specification does not address live migration and in fact currently precludes migration. Migration is fundamental so the device specification at least mustn't preclude it. Having brainstormed migration with Matthew Benjamin and Michael Tsirkin, I am now summarizing the approach that I want to include in the next draft specification. Feedback

Michael pointed out that the virtio-vsock draft specification does not address live migration and in fact currently precludes migration. Migration is fundamental so the device specification at least mustn't preclude it. Having brainstormed migration with Matthew Benjamin and Michael Tsirkin, I am now summarizing the approach that I want to include in the next draft specification. Feedback

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Joshua Cranmer <pidgeot18 at gmail.com> wrote: > On 1/8/2013 8:30 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >> Wow, requiring GCC 4.7 would be really aggressive, it was just released in >> March 2012. Call me conservative, but I was thinking that a reasonable GCC >> baseline would be GCC 4.4 or something (which is ~3.5 years old). > > >

Hello, I recently upgraded our file server from RedHat6.2 to RedHat7.2. This upgraded our (working) Samba 2.0.x to 2.2.1a-4. Now, the windows98 machines on the network can print without problems. The 2K/NT4 machines cannot print, but they experience no problems with file sharing operations (writeable /home/$USER). The 2K/NT4 machines had been printing fine prior to the upgrade. I won't

Hello, I want to create and save objects in a loop, but this is precluded by the following obstacle: this part of the script fails to work: assign(x=paste("a", 1, sep=""), value=1); save(paste("a", 1, sep=""), file=paste(paste("a", 1, sep=""), ".RData", sep="")) Do you know any workaround? I am already out of ideas.

Hello all, In the process of porting the Polly plug-in to Windows we encountered a couple of issues stemming from the use (within Polly) of global data from LLVM. By far the most common occurrence of this is the definition by a class of a publicly accessible static ID, the address of which is used to uniquely identify the class. For example class AliasAnalysis { public:

I'm relatively new to LLVM so apologies in advance if this is a dumb question. I've been experimenting with re-targeting LLVM onto a 16-bit micro which has pre and post increment and decrement addressing modes. I've been using llvm-gcc to generate llvm bitcode and llvm 2.7 to go from here to my target assembly code. I've got the Combine pass to deal with

Currently these leave in lib/Transforms/ObjCARC even though they are analysis passes. This seems confusing and odd. In particular, Analysis/Passes.h talks about ObjCARCAliasAnalysis. =/ I'd like to just move the analysis headers to live under include/llvm/Analysis and the source under lib/Analysis. This will preclude omitting the ObjC ARC analysis passes from your build of LLVM if you

I am not currently subscribed so please email me below. First, my only experience with rsync has been older versions (e.g. 1.7.x) which did not allow daemon mode, so please bear with me. My problem is that I would like to mirror large quantities of data on a remote machine to a local one, but I don't care about encrypting the data itself. I only care about securing the connection from the

The default generic method for "show" has arguments show(object) -- (no "...") -- which precludes any kind of arguments like "digits", etc. Is it impossible, or a horrible idea, to override the generic definition? (The "arm" package has defined a new generic, "display", which does a similar thing but has an intermediate level of detail

...convert to raw shrink the image convert back to qcow[2] increase the image size to provide for some growth I'm hoping I've missed something in my research and that someone knows an easier way. I don't feel constrained to qemu-img but this is a production environment precluding consideration of experimental software. Virt-resize, guestfish or any other reasonable option is fine with me. Solutions or ideas? Thanks.

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 22:22 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On non-PPC systems, virtio_pci should use the DMA API. This fixes > virtio_pci on Xen. On PPC, using the DMA API would break things, so > we need to preserve the old behavior. > > The big comment in this patch explains the considerations in more > detail. I still disagree with using CONFIG_PPC as a trigger here.

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 22:22 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On non-PPC systems, virtio_pci should use the DMA API. This fixes > virtio_pci on Xen. On PPC, using the DMA API would break things, so > we need to preserve the old behavior. > > The big comment in this patch explains the considerations in more > detail. I still disagree with using CONFIG_PPC as a trigger here.