search for: propogate

Hi All, I was looking into MachineCopyPropagationPass.ccp file in llvm, which in first look, looks likes to me doing only redundant copy elimination in same basic block. I am interested in any pass which is doing copy propogation across the basic block in a function. Let me know if any such pass exist ? Thanks, Deepali -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

# users would benefit from a warning about the behavior in the # groups.unbalanced case below. A propogation of difference is the variance # calculation is leading to an apparently significant difference in # means, even though the numeric values are all identical. Obviously upon # inspection the difference in means is meaningless, but users might be warned # if all of the input data is

...y. In the meantime, I have two DNS hacks in place to get requests flowing to the right machines [this is partly for the benefit of the other site admins]: Motherfish-HST has been temporarily updated to point at Motherfish-II, the new DNS server; this host record change will appear at noon EST and propogate slowly through the day. When the real domain transfer happens, we'll change this back. Motherfish, the actual machine, is redirecting queries to the new nameserver until the old facility shuts down today. Until then, it's stuffing network DNS as full of the new xiph.org records as it can...

...y. In the meantime, I have two DNS hacks in place to get requests flowing to the right machines [this is partly for the benefit of the other site admins]: Motherfish-HST has been temporarily updated to point at Motherfish-II, the new DNS server; this host record change will appear at noon EST and propogate slowly through the day. When the real domain transfer happens, we'll change this back. Motherfish, the actual machine, is redirecting queries to the new nameserver until the old facility shuts down today. Until then, it's stuffing network DNS as full of the new xiph.org records as it can...

...y. In the meantime, I have two DNS hacks in place to get requests flowing to the right machines [this is partly for the benefit of the other site admins]: Motherfish-HST has been temporarily updated to point at Motherfish-II, the new DNS server; this host record change will appear at noon EST and propogate slowly through the day. When the real domain transfer happens, we'll change this back. Motherfish, the actual machine, is redirecting queries to the new nameserver until the old facility shuts down today. Until then, it's stuffing network DNS as full of the new xiph.org records as it can...

...y. In the meantime, I have two DNS hacks in place to get requests flowing to the right machines [this is partly for the benefit of the other site admins]: Motherfish-HST has been temporarily updated to point at Motherfish-II, the new DNS server; this host record change will appear at noon EST and propogate slowly through the day. When the real domain transfer happens, we'll change this back. Motherfish, the actual machine, is redirecting queries to the new nameserver until the old facility shuts down today. Until then, it's stuffing network DNS as full of the new xiph.org records as it can...

...y. In the meantime, I have two DNS hacks in place to get requests flowing to the right machines [this is partly for the benefit of the other site admins]: Motherfish-HST has been temporarily updated to point at Motherfish-II, the new DNS server; this host record change will appear at noon EST and propogate slowly through the day. When the real domain transfer happens, we'll change this back. Motherfish, the actual machine, is redirecting queries to the new nameserver until the old facility shuts down today. Until then, it's stuffing network DNS as full of the new xiph.org records as it can...

...y. In the meantime, I have two DNS hacks in place to get requests flowing to the right machines [this is partly for the benefit of the other site admins]: Motherfish-HST has been temporarily updated to point at Motherfish-II, the new DNS server; this host record change will appear at noon EST and propogate slowly through the day. When the real domain transfer happens, we'll change this back. Motherfish, the actual machine, is redirecting queries to the new nameserver until the old facility shuts down today. Until then, it's stuffing network DNS as full of the new xiph.org records as it can...

My apologies for not including the transcript in the original message: > xx <- rep(2.10,80) > groups.balanced <- as.factor(c(rep("one",40),rep("two",40))) > groups.unbalanced <- as.factor(c(rep("one",44),rep("two",36))) > t.test(xx ~ groups.balanced) Welch Two Sample t-test data: xx by groups.balanced t = 0, df = 78, p-value = 1

Hi, I've been trying to get some database applications working on a mixed Windows/Linux environment using Wine on the Linux end. A recent patch to Wine finally implements the LockFile() and UnlockFile() functions, and testing on pure Linux setups works fine. However, Sharing from Windows and connecting from smbfs on Linux, the locks aren't respected. Alexandre Julliard confirms

On Nov 30, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Paul Robinson wrote: > Part of the confusion seems to come from overloading "undefined." > The VAX architecture spec nicely dealt with the distinction between > unspecified results and unspecified behavior by consistently using > distinct terms: _unpredictable_ results, and _undefined_ behavior. > An operation producing an unpredictable

Hello Les, Thanks for that info. I'm playing with this now and although the 'failover' process seems rather slow, it does seem to be doing what I need. I setup a subdomain entry to point to 4 IP's, only one if which is actually working, and indeed, when IE get's a non-active IP, it eventually goes to the next one until it finally finds the actual live IP. Once it gets the

Hi all, I have an average 2mbit multicast stream that once in a while bursts high (up to 20mbit/s) in short periods (about 200ms). Could anyone please help me with directions using tc for configuing leaky bucket shaping to this stream? I have a 5mbit/s ceiling. My system is running gentoo linux 2.6.14, and I have compiled in all QoS modules. Thanks. Oivind

Dan Gohman <gohman at apple.com> writes: > Prohibiting poison values from propogating through memory would mean > that the reg2mem pass would no longer be a semantics-preserving pass. Or it means you couldn't demote those values. > Prohibiting it from propogating through control flow would mean that a > select instruction wouldn't be equivalent to a conditional branch

In the latest SMB-HOWTO doc,I see the following words: SMB services cannot be used across routers. If you want to do something like that, you would need to set up an IP tunnel ... Is that true? Is that the reason that I can't see the LinuxBox in Windoz net neighbourhood,but can find it using "find computer"?

Just to clarify, I'm looking at this from an application layer Point of View. One of the reasons why I'm looking at it that way, is because Tim said he was looking at LinuxHA..."application level" redundancy that uses IP. Tim, just to let you know, I don't believe that LinuxHA will work in the way you described, only because of the different IP ranges. It looks like Linux

I cannot reach voip-info - is it just me or is the site not available ? Julian

I have this same problem in our backend. I solve it by adding a pseudo instruction at instruction selection that transforms @R1 into R1, so only a single pattern is required. I then can propogate the pseudo instruction after instruction selection. Micah From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Lu Mitnick Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 10:29 AM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] Question about porting LLVM - a single instruction...

> On Aug 23, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 01:46:12AM +0100, Russell Wallace via llvm-dev wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Michael Zolotukhin <mzolotukhin at apple.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Several passes would have troubles

It is likely a problem with survival, since 2.9 merged in a large number of changes that had occured in my source tree that had not propogated to the R tree my test suite doesn't have a test for this particular case (2 factors) and - Murphy's law applies: although almost every possible case is covered in the test suite, any new error will hit an omitted combination of options with high probability. I won't get...