Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "setbit".
Did you mean:
set_bit
2011 Mar 06
0
[LLVMdev] First Patch
...ant here because it's already been initialized to zero
in the constructor. If you'd reuse the old mask variable as suggested
above you'd need this, but see below.
> +
> + // Disregarding the sign bit
> + for (int i = (width - 2); i > power; i--)
> + mask.setBit(i);
I think this is equivalent to
if (power < width-2)
mask = APInt::getBitsSet(width, power+1, width-2);
else
mask.clearAllBits();
(This would mean the clearAllBits() above would again be redundant)
However, a nice way to handle the signbit-only case would be to wrap
that in an ex...
2011 Mar 06
1
[LLVMdev] First Patch
Hi all!
I've been tinkering with LLVM's code-base for a few days, hoping to
start on one of the ideas mentioned in the "Open Projects" page (I was
told 'Improving the current system'/'Miscellaneous Improvements'/5 would
be a good start).
While I was at it, I also took a stab at finishing up one of the TODOs.
I've attached the patch for review.
--
2011 Mar 02
3
[LLVMdev] live variable analysis
Hi
As I understand live variable analysis will set the def/kill
properties of operands. In that case, is it still needed to set the
kill flags when possible during lowering?
thanks
dz
2007 Jul 08
0
patch to enhance sound module for 96 kHz/24 bit sample sizes
...mber of bits per sample (8 or 16). Here,
filenames are not accepted.
}
\value{
- For \code{bits}, the bits parameter (number of bits per sample) of
the Sample object, 8 or 16.
+ For \code{bits}, the bits parameter (number of bits per sample) of
the Sample object, 8, 16, or 24.
For \code{setBits}, a Sample object with the new \code{bits} parameter.
}
Only in sound/man: bits.Rd~
diff -ru sound-orig/man/loadSample.Rd sound/man/loadSample.Rd
--- sound-orig/man/loadSample.Rd 2006-02-20 12:57:00.000000000 -0500
+++ sound/man/loadSample.Rd 2007-07-08 19:35:31.000000000 -0400
@@ -11,7 +11...
2015 Sep 14
7
RFC: speedups with instruction side-data (ADCE, perhaps others?)
I’ve been playing around with optimizing performance various passes and noticed something about ADCE: it keeps an Alive set that requires a lot of upkeep time-wise, but if each instruction had a /single bit/ of side data (to represent liveness, solely within the pass), the set wouldn’t be needed. I tested this out and observed a ~1/3 reduction in time in ADCE: 1454ms to 982ms according to a
2012 Jan 09
39
[PATCH v4 00/25] xen: ARMv7 with virtualization extensions
...n/arch/arm/lib/lib1funcs.S | 302 ++++++++++++++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S | 64 ++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memmove.S | 200 +++++++++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memset.S | 129 +++++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memzero.S | 127 +++++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/setbit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/lib/testchangebit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/lib/testclearbit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/lib/testsetbit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/mm.c | 321 +++++++++++++++++
xen/arch/arm/p2m.c | 214 +++++++++++
xen...
2011 Dec 06
57
[PATCH RFC 00/25] xen: ARMv7 with virtualization extensions
...| 274 +++++++++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memcpy.S | 64 +++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memmove.S | 200 ++++++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memset.S | 129 +++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/memzero.S | 127 +++++
xen/arch/arm/lib/setbit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/lib/testchangebit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/lib/testclearbit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/lib/testsetbit.S | 18 +
xen/arch/arm/mm.c | 321 +++++++++++++
xen/arch/arm/p2m.c...
2006 Nov 17
1
gjournal on 6.x wont build
Hi all,
I was intending on trying out gjournal on a new disk i've added in my
desktop. I had a look to see what the most recent patch provided by
Pawel and found
http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/gjournal6_20061024.patch
I created the directories as per Pawel's original post
(http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2006-June/001962.html)
and the patch succeeded with no failed