search for: semed

Hi all, While developing compile-time instrumentation for ThreadSanitizer (http://code.google.com/p/data-race-test) I need to generate SEME regions without loop and call instructions (I'll call them superblocks hereafter, although some researchers do allow loops in their definition of superblocks). This is necessary to get the largest piece of IR in which the memory operations can be

Tobias, Thanks for taking the time to summarize all this. It's a great writeup. I'm moving the thread to llvm-dev. My responses below. On May 21, 2012, at 5:06 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > First of all some information about the RegionInfo pass: > > ======================================================================= > The very first paper I

On Mar 24, 2008, at 10:47 PM, Christopher Lamb wrote: > I know that this has been discussed (at least in passing) a few > times on the list, but I couldn't locate a bug for it. Have any > architectural plans been made for it? Funny you bring this up. Evan and I were tossing around crazy ideas about this just today. If you're interested, maybe we should get together for

I know that this has been discussed (at least in passing) a few times on the list, but I couldn't locate a bug for it. Have any architectural plans been made for it? Are there architectural roadblocks with the current LLVM infrastructure that will complicate the process? What has demotivated the implementation of this so far (is it not that big a benefit on important targets, too

Very nice! Why did you decide on hyperblock instead of SEME region and how are you forming the blocks? Evan On Apr 20, 2008, at 9:59 PM, Christopher Lamb wrote: > I thought I'd share a little bit of progress I made this weekend. > I've gotten the first interesting test-case (a simple switch) > through hyperblock-based DAGISel, and there's a pretty picture too! >

...s on Makefile for the Makedeps and R targets. I am using gnu Make 3.79, gcc 2.95.3, Solaris SunOS5.8 on an UltraSparc. I double checked that I had found the problem by rerunning make with the distributed makefile restored, but the looping behavior did not recur. When I ran make check, everything semed to be OK.

I thought I'd share a little bit of progress I made this weekend. I've gotten the first interesting test-case (a simple switch) through hyperblock-based DAGISel, and there's a pretty picture too! Each part of the switch is emitted directly into the DAG, rather than being deferred. This is the function: define i32 @foo(i32 %x, i32 %z) nounwind { entry: switch i32 %x,

Last time I asked here about superblocks (which we were using in the first version of ThreadSanitizer instrumentation) Tobias Grosser has suggested to use RegionInfo: did you have a look at the RegionInfo pass? It currently detects some kind of refinded SESE regions. I use them in Polly and as far as I know the Intel OpenCL SDK also uses them in some way. It is not SEME, but it may

G'day all, I update wine daily from cvs and install it into /usr/local/wine using a custom script, not the wine install script. Previously all the shared libs were in /usr/local/wine/lib and this dir was picked up by ldconfig and everyone was happy. Now I have /usr/local/wine/lib and /usr/local/wine/lib/wine ldconfig picks up the former but not the latter. To get wine to work I have to set

Hi, I'm trying to solve a problem from StructurizeCFG not actually handling regions with multiple exits. Sample IR attached. StructurizeCFG doesn't touch this function, exiting early on the isTopLevelRegion check. SIAnnotateControlFlow then gets confused and ends up inserting an if into one of the blocks, and the matching end.cf into one of the return/unreachable blocks. The input to

The existing lifetime start/end is not very well defined (by spec, or by code) in what it means, so you could have nested lifetime markers if you wanted. If you made the spec well-defined, they would be meaningful (for loops, etc). There are a number of open bugs/complaints about lifetime markers and the fact that the scope is not well defined (the spec says "This intrinsic indicates that

Hi all I'm trying to set up dfs for (among other things) profiles (i don't know if this is a good example, but that is out of the scope of my current question) I've been following these instructions: http://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/msdfs.html http://us.generation-nt.com/answer/samba-domain-dfs-samba-4-help-209347402.html as well as the hints given in the

Hello I wonder whether there is an r tool or package available for testing for the null of same skewness or kurtosis of two independent samples. It semes that nsRFA package uses L-moments for soothing similar but I could not get how to use the package for the above test. Any pointers, help, example and etc. will be most welcome. Many thanks Ed [[alternative HTML

G'day all, I am struggling with a problem I can't identify, related to window focus when running wine not using desktop or managed mode. When using managed mode, it works wine, but I want to use it in this instance with an xinit /usr/bin/wine programname This works ok, until I get some sort of message dialog come up, then what happens is wine seems to switch focus rapidly between the

Hi folks, today I tried to switch from a samba 2.2.2 PDC to a samba 2.2.7 PDC. Everything semed to be working fine with smbclient. Windows user couldn't log on, but with following differences: * users belonging to the domain admin group could log on from Win2k boxes * normal users couldn't log on from win2k boxes, with the usual "check if you didn't mis-type usernam...

Hi! I'm having problems with SeaClear II v1.0.0.196. After setting up the symlinks in ~/.wine/dosdevices pointing to my gps-device (GlobalSat BU-353 USB) everything works as expected, but for some reason Wine/SeaClear steals all available CPU-time. 100% all the time. This problem does not exist if I start SeaClear with the GPS disconnected, making me belive there is a problem with

Hi guys, I do seme help-out work for a company whose IT guys setup a FC4 box with Samba (fully up to date via YUM) running as a DC. The client desktops are all identical (at least after they got stolen and replaced). Profiles are roaming, so the users can log on on any machine. The software they run is fairly limited - Office 2003, Outlook with Communigate Pro plugin, Norman antivirus, Adobe

On 4/24/2013 8:05 PM, Nadav Rotem wrote: > > Everything. This includes all of the custom lowering code for all of the > targets, all of dagcombine, and maybe all of the patterns in the TD files. I may have missed the discussion, but why are we trying to move away from the SelectionDAG? Are there specific problems that we don't want to fix or live with? If so, what are they?

Version: 3.0.14a (debian stable: 3sarge1) I'm just about finished converting our company's network from NIS to LDAP. Part of that involved updating Samba to use that same directory so all the information is maintained in one place. Most everything is good, except that my roaming profiles won't work. My smb.conf file is attached. Upping the log level eventually showed messages

On Sep 17, 2012, at 9:13 AM, Tomas Minac <minac.tomas at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Andy, > > thank you for your respond, > > On 09/06/12 21:32, Andrew Trick wrote: >> >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Tomas Minac <minac.tomas at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am member of research team on our Faculty