Displaying 20 results from an estimated 95 matches for "telecomms".
Did you mean:
telecomm
2017 Apr 20
2
[RFC] FP contract = on
Hey folks,
Some progress has been made since the first thread:
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-March/111129.html
And also I think the consensus is to enable "-ffp-contract=on" by
default (instead of "fast"), which seems to be working on some
preliminary tests I made.
I just ran the test-suite on x86_64 and AArch64. The former is ok, the
latter still has some
2013 Jan 17
3
[LLVMdev] local test-suite failures on linux
Hi,
I get the following failures when I run the test-suite on linux (Ubuntu 12.04) using LNT (lnt runtest nt ...):
(all are execution failures)
MultiSource/Applications/Burg
MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV
MultiSource/Applications/lemon
MultiSource/Applications/obsequi
MultiSource/Benchmarks/MiBench/automotive-bitcount
2013 Feb 19
4
[LLVMdev] ARM LNT test-suite Buildbot
Hi Folks,
Looks like our LNT ARM buildbot with the vectorizer is running and
producing good results. There are only 11 failures:
FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/Burg/burg.execution_time (1 of 1104)
FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.execution_time (2 of 1104)
FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/lemon/lemon.execution_time (3 of 1104)
FAIL:
2013 Jan 20
2
[LLVMdev] local test-suite failures on linux
There is almost certainly a bug in lnt or the makefiles.
I changed the body of Burg main to the following:
+ printf("Hello World\n");
+ return 0;
I re-ran the test-suite again and got the following errors:
--- Tested: 986 tests --
FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/Burg/burg.execution_time (494 of 986)
FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.execution_time (495 of 986)
FAIL:
2013 Feb 19
0
[LLVMdev] ARM LNT test-suite Buildbot
Hi Renato,
I've investigated a few of these for AArch64 recently, and some of the
results will be applicable in the 32-bit world too.
> MultiSource/Benchmarks/McCat/12-IOtest/iotest.execution_time
This is because of disagreement between ABIs over whether "char" is
signed. ARM says no, x86 says yes.
>
2013 Jan 20
0
[LLVMdev] local test-suite failures on linux
Hi,
I figured out how to resolve the failures. I noticed that Mountain Lion
includes Bison 2.3 while Ubuntu 12.04 includes Bison 2.5. I installed
Bison 2.3 from source in Ubuntu and the failures went away.
I'm a little concerned that the bison version fixed all the failures I was
seeing. To my knowledge the only failing test that depended on bison was
Burg. It almost looks like one failure
2013 Aug 11
2
[LLVMdev] [FastPolly]: Update of Polly's performance on LLVM test-suite
Hi all,
I have evaluated Polly's performance on LLVM test-suite with latest LLVM (r188054) and Polly (r187981). Results can be viewed on: http://188.40.87.11:8000.
There are mainly five new tests and each test is run with 10 samples:
clang (run id = 27): clang -O3
pollyBasic (run id = 28): clang -O3 -load LLVMPolly.so
pollyNoGen (run id = 29): pollycc -O3 -mllvm -polly-optimizer=none
2007 Sep 12
2
Generating an old-fashioned dialtone
Is there a way to generate an old-fashioned dial tone with Asterisk?
I'm thinking of one that sounds like:
http://www.seg.co.uk/telecomm/dialtone.wav
--
Phil Reynolds
o ____ mail: phil at tinsleyviaduct.com
|L_ \ / Web: http://www.tinsleyviaduct.com/phil/
(_)- \/ Waltham 66, Emley Moor 69, Droitwich 79, Windows 95
2007 Sep 05
3
E1 Line Tapping
Hi all,
My name is Ricardo and unfortunately I'm just crawling in this
telecomm/asterisk world. So, after reading all day long i still don't
understand a few things. :D
I'm trying to "develop" a call recorder for a costumer. He has a small
call center ( 10 agents ) and want to record all calls. Since he already has
everything (ACD only) working perfectly in the PBX and
2003 Jun 01
2
ISDN4Linux + Asterisk and Europe
Hello,
Anyone on this group using / implementing * and hardware certified for
use in Europe ? I believe that ISDN4Linux cards mostly have telecomm
certificates, so using them should be safe on the client side. Are there
any major issues / problems associated with using such cards with * ?
I am talking about a small / very small office with single - few lines.
All the best,
Piotr Adamiak
--
2010 Mar 24
1
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] 2.7 Pre-release1 available for testing
On 03/17/2010 10:12 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote:
> The 2.7 binaries are available for testing:
> http://llvm.org/pre-releases/2.7/pre-release1/
>
> You will also find the source tarballs there as well.
>
> We rely on the community to help make our releases great, so please help
> test 2.7 if you can. Please follow these instructions to test 2.7:
>
> /To test llvm-gcc:/
2005 May 11
2
Multiple Internet links - routing traffic to the correct one.
...Internet
\192.168.1.x __/ | | |
\__ __/ | eth2 (dyn) | \
\___/ +------+-------+ +------------+ |
254| |ppp0 | | \
(eth3)| +-------------+ Telecomms +-------
| adsl link | ADSL | |
___ | +------------+ \________
_/ \__ |
__/ \___ |
/ \----+
| Local Network |
\__172.16.1.x__/
\__ ___/
\_/
In words:
Two local LAN'...
2013 Jan 22
0
[LLVMdev] local test-suite failures on linux
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote:
> There is almost certainly a bug in lnt or the makefiles.
>
> I changed the body of Burg main to the following:
>
> + printf("Hello World\n");
> + return 0;
>
>
> I re-ran the test-suite again and got the following errors:
>
> --- Tested: 986 tests --
> FAIL:
2011 Apr 30
2
[LLVMdev] Greedy register allocation
Perhaps you noticed that LLVM gained a new optimizing register allocator yesterday (r130568). Linear scan is going away, and RAGreedy is the new default for optimizing builds.
Hopefully, you noticed because your binaries were suddenly 2% smaller and 10% faster*. Some noticed because LLVM started crashing or miscompiling their code. Greedy replaces a fairly big chunk of the code generator, so
2010 Mar 30
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] 2.7 Pre-release1 available for testing
On Mar 24, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Török Edwin wrote:
> On 03/17/2010 10:12 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote:
>> The 2.7 binaries are available for testing:
>> http://llvm.org/pre-releases/2.7/pre-release1/
>>
>> You will also find the source tarballs there as well.
>>
>> We rely on the community to help make our releases great, so please help
>> test 2.7 if you
2012 Feb 19
2
[LLVMdev] Problem While Running Test Suite
Hello;
I was able to build and install llvm(3.0) under Ubuntu 11.10 (using the
./configure script found under llvm source, and then make and make
install). While configuring, I gave --prefix as a directory where I would
like llvm to be installed. I did not give --with-llvmgccdir and the
--enable-optimized argument to configure. Because 3.0 doesn't come with
llvmgcc source/binaries and I
2013 Aug 11
0
[LLVMdev] [FastPolly]: Update of Polly's performance on LLVM test-suite
On 08/10/2013 06:59 PM, Star Tan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have evaluated Polly's performance on LLVM test-suite with latest LLVM (r188054) and Polly (r187981). Results can be viewed on: http://188.40.87.11:8000.
Hi Star Tan,
thanks for the update.
> There are mainly five new tests and each test is run with 10 samples:
> clang (run id = 27): clang -O3
> pollyBasic (run id =
2004 Oct 04
2
300 extensions on Asterisk?
...ning an * box with just 8 extensions connected to our old Alcatel BCN
5200 PABX.
The requirement is that we now scale it up to handle about 300 lines and get
rid of our old PABX. Is there a way of hooking up 300 phones to asterisk
without going via the PABX. I am more of a network person than a telecomms
one so i may not fully understand some technologies.
I note that an E1 channel bank might be used with FXS interfaces but looks
like I may need a whole bunch of these to get than many lines.
Any help/ponters will be appreciated
Many thanks
Anthony
- --
I always tell the truth, even when I l...
2013 Aug 12
1
[LLVMdev] [FastPolly]: Update of Polly's performance on LLVM test-suite
At 2013-08-12 01:18:30,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:
>On 08/10/2013 06:59 PM, Star Tan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have evaluated Polly's performance on LLVM test-suite with latest LLVM (r188054) and Polly (r187981). Results can be viewed on: http://188.40.87.11:8000.
>
>Hi Star Tan,
>
>thanks for the update.
>
2018 Jan 22
2
always allow canonicalizing to 8- and 16-bit ops?
Thanks for the perf testing. I assume that DAG legalization is equipped to
handle these cases fairly well, or someone would've complained by now...
FWIW (and at least some of this can be blamed on me), instcombine already
does the narrowing transforms without checking shouldChangeType() for
binops like and/or/xor/udiv. The justification was that narrower ops are
always better for