search for: scavenged

...nly right before register it is freeing up. Maybe I'm misunderstanding this code. // If the target knows how to save/restore the register, let it do so; // otherwise, use the emergency stack spill slot. if (!TRI->saveScavengerRegister(*MBB, I, UseMI, RC, SReg)) { // Spill the scavenged register before I. assert(ScavengingFrameIndex >= 0 && "Cannot scavenge register without an emergency spill slot!"); TII->storeRegToStackSlot(*MBB, I, SReg, true, ScavengingFrameIndex, RC,TRI); MachineBasicBlock::iterator II = prior(I); TRI-&...

Hello everybody, I try to install samba on ubuntu server 13.04 So I downloaded the 4.0.9 version of samba but when the make I get this error: ../source3/smbd/scavenger.c : In function 'scavenger_timer' : ../source3/smbd/scavenger.c: 482:3 : error : format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'uint64_t' [-Werror=format]

I read the 4.9 “Features added" release notes about newly available DNS scavenging features, and the problem with domains that were set up in earlier versions of samba AD. "It is now possible to enable scavenging of DNS Zones to remove DNS records that were dynamically created and have not been touched in some time.” “This support should however only be enabled on new zones or new

Hi there, I tried to build samba 4.0.9 on a Debian Wheezy 7.1 x86 fresh install and got this error: [2717/3935] Compiling source3/smbd/scavenger.c ../source3/smbd/scavenger.c: In function ?scavenger_timer?: ../source3/smbd/scavenger.c:482:3: error: format ?%lu? expects argument of type ?long unsigned int?, but argument 3 has type ?uint64_t? [-Werror=format] ../source3/smbd/scavenger.c:490:3:

...is freeing up. > > Maybe I'm misunderstanding this code. > > // If the target knows how to save/restore the register, let it do so; > // otherwise, use the emergency stack spill slot. > if (!TRI->saveScavengerRegister(*MBB, I, UseMI, RC, SReg)) { > // Spill the scavenged register before I. > assert(ScavengingFrameIndex >= 0 && > "Cannot scavenge register without an emergency spill slot!"); > TII->storeRegToStackSlot(*MBB, I, SReg, true, ScavengingFrameIndex, > RC,TRI); > MachineBasicBlock::iterator II =...

You mean when I "explicity" use it by calling methods of register scavenger? Right now I'm just allocating virtual registers that will be resolved by the use of register scavenger and I'm also providing an override of the virtual method saveScavengerRegister. In Mips16, I have an extra mips 32 register (not usually very useful since it can only be used in a move instruction)

...might be some downside to this. We would have to add some >> target-dependent callback to tell the register scavenger how many slots >> to reserve (the default would be 1). Do you think that this is worth >> doing? >> > > I started modifying the backend to support 2 scavenged registers only to > end up realizing half way through that in our case we don't need two. > > On Hexagon we can get around the requirement for the second register (the > first for storing the predicate, second for a large offset that does not > fit into the spill instruction) by...

I ran into another issue with register scavenger. In my case, I don't need a place on the stack for an emergency spill slot. I have these free mips32 registers, that are not in general very useful for other things, for the emergency spill slot. I can move to and from mips16 (subset of mips32) registers and mips32 registers. I also have a situation where I need two free registers so then

CC the list. On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Arnold Schwaighofer <arnold.schwaighofer at gmail.com> wrote: > Assuming you use the scavenger in your own code yes. > > A usage could look like: > > for all basic blocks BB: > RS->enter(BB) > for all instructions CurrInst in block order: > if CurrInst has virtual def > CurrReg = RS->scavenge(CurrInst)

Hi Jakob, I believe Hal is trying to enable register scavenger to find two (or more) registers that can be used as temporaries. One problem I see with this approach is that, if you use register scavenger during PEI, you will have to pessimistically set aside two emergency spill slots before you call scavengeRegister, even if it turns out you only need one. Having an extra stack slot might not be

Thanks Jon and Hal for the helpful pointers. By returning true from requiresRegisterScavenging() and requiresFrameIndexScavenging(), LLVM handled all the scavenging effort. That is nearly painless for the target, so why do some targets seem to do scavenging on their own? When the scavenged register is loaded with a simple immediate, is it safe to search the BB and replace other uses of the same immediate with the reg? In my case this gives a code size reduction. The search would stop on finding another use of the scavenged register. Thanks, -steve On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:15 PM,...

Hi, I would like to know what register scavenging is, but reading RegisterScavenging.h [1] and googling don't help too much. Could someone explain it a little bit (what it is and when we need it), or point me to some nice link, I will be very appreciated. :-) [1] http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/RegisterScavenging_8h_source.html Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Homepage:

This patch adds parameter "EliminateFI" to RegScavenger::scavengeRegister, which tells register scavenger not to eliminate frame index of the emergency spill slot if set to false. I have pseudo load, store and copy instructions which are generated during register allocation and expanded post-RA but before the final stack size is known. I use register scavenger to search for a temporary

On Mar 25, 2013, at 12:04 PM, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: > This patch adds parameter "EliminateFI" to RegScavenger::scavengeRegister, which tells register scavenger not to eliminate frame index of the emergency spill slot if set to false. > > I have pseudo load, store and copy instructions which are generated during register allocation and expanded

Hi, attached is a second try for the bigstack patch for SPU, with testcase. It is essentially the patch committed as 97091, and reverted as 97099, but with the following additions: -in vararg handling, registers are marked to be live, to not confuse the register scavenger -function prologue and epilogue are not emitted, if the stack size is 16. 16 means it is empty - there is only the

On Mar 25, 2013, at 1:41 PM, Akira Hatanaka <ahatanak at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jakob, > > I believe Hal is trying to enable register scavenger to find two (or more) registers that can be used as temporaries. > > One problem I see with this approach is that, if you use register scavenger during PEI, you will have to pessimistically set aside two emergency spill slots before

I have a question about register scavenger. I am considering using register scavenger for MIPS to free up register AT which is currently reserved to load large immediates. All targets which currently use register scavenger to search for a scratch register (ARM, CellSPU, PowerPC and XCore) override function processFunctionBeforeCalleeSavedScan and call RegisterScavenger::setScavengingFrameIndex

Hi! I have some problems with spill/reload and register scavenging which result in illegal code. As our apps, compiled by LLVM and our backend, become more and more complex we have the following problem with our backend: In most cases registers are spilled on function entry to stack slots and reloaded on function exit. At some points registers are spilled and reloaded via register scavenging.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.4 (Tikanga) Samba 3.0.33-3.15.el5_4.1 I have run into an issue where the DNS records added by a net ads join seem to be being scavenged. From what I understand, Windows servers/workstations check in (update their host record) on the AD DNS server on a regular basis. So the question is, how can I have samba/winbind do the same? I could just setup a cron job that executes: net ads dns register -P But that's kind of ugly. I k...

On Feb 28, 2010, at 11:49 PM, <Kalle.Raiskila at nokia.com> <Kalle.Raiskila at nokia.com> wrote: > Jakob Stoklund Olesen skrev: >> On Feb 26, 2010, at 10:09 AM, Scott Michel wrote: >>> This patch now causes new problems in the CellSPU >>> backend (more stqd's and lqd's), so I have to investigate those >>> before committing the patch. >