search for: throughed

This is Chris' call to make, imo. -j On Aug 22, 2012, at 3:59 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote: > Ping. > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote: > Ping. > > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard

Ping. On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > Ping. > > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> > <dropping llvm-commits> >> > >> > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander

Ping. On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > > <dropping llvm-commits> > > > > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > > > >> Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, > >> > >> There was a discussion on

<dropping llvm-commits> On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, > > There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. I missed the earlier discussion, so I'm sorry for chiming in late. > I propose to add the LLVM_FALLTHROUGH macro for specifying intended

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 143119 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 143120 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 143121 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 143122 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 143123 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 143124 Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva at embeddedor.com> ---

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1260018 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1260019 Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1260022 Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva at embeddedor.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/timing.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git

From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo at embeddedor.com> Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 21:42:05 -0500 > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1402059 ("Missing break in switch") > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1402060 ("Missing break in switch") >

On Jul 26, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > <dropping llvm-commits> > > On Jul 2, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > >> Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, >> >> There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. > > I missed the earlier

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Cameron McInally <cameron.mcinally at nyu.edu>wrote: > Hey Alex, > > Sorry if this is a silly question... are you asking if anyone "wants the > functionality proposed" or "wants to write the code for the functionality > proposed"? > *-Wimplicit-fallthrough* diagnostic is already implemented, and the patch in this thread

I am working on cleaning up some PPC code generation. Two questions: 1. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up self-moves: 0x00000000100057c0 <+208>: mr r3,r3 2. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up unconditional jumps that should be fall-throughs: 0x0000000010005d88 <+1688>: b 0x10005d8c <._Z11sfoo+1692> 0x0000000010005d8c <+1692>: ld

In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases where we are expecting to fall through. Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo at embeddedor.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/disp/hdmi.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/dma/usernv04.c | 1 + drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/fifo/nv04.c | 2 ++

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 11:08 AM Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo at embeddedor.com> wrote: > > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch > cases where we are expecting to fall through. > > Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 > > Notice that, in some cases, the code comment is modified > in accordance with what GCC is expecting to find.

Hi, Friendly ping: Who can take this? Thanks -- Gustavo On 10/17/18 9:28 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > where we are expecting to fall through. > > This patch aims to suppress 29 missing-break-in-switch false positives. > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1456891 ("Missing break in switch") >

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > I am working on cleaning up some PPC code generation. Two questions: > > 1. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up self-moves: > 0x00000000100057c0 <+208>: mr r3,r3 > > 2. Which pass is responsible for cleaning up unconditional jumps that > should be fall-throughs: >

Hi llvmdev, llvm-commits, There was a discussion on this topic a while ago, and now I've decided to make a formal proposal and post it here. I propose to add the LLVM_FALLTHROUGH macro for specifying intended fall-through locations between switch cases. *INTRODUCTION* The switch construct of C/C++ languages allows fall-throughs between switch labels when control flow is not directed

I have a domain with two Samba DC's I don't want to use either of them as a fileserver, so I want to build a separate file server which is not a DC, which will deliver all the files to the lovely little windows users (including their roaming profiles). I've been looking online and there seems to be a thousand different ways to "join" my fileserver to the domain, but most of

Hi, I'm facing a samba internal dns problem. Every command which starts with "samba-tool dns" throughs the following exception: ERROR(runtime): uncaught exception - (-1073741801, 'Memory allocation error') File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py", line 175, in _run return self.run(*args, **kwargs) File

I am having a problem with doing a :through that goes back to the same table. The following are my two classes: >>>>> class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :spanks has_many :spanked, :through => :spanks, :source => :spanked_user has_many :was_spanked_by, :through => :spanks, :source => :user end class Spank < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :spanker,