search for: unexecutable

I downloaded Baldur's Gate II but I can't Install it because it's an unexecutabe bit

> On 2015 May 27, at 07:42, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Lee Hunt <leehu at exchange.microsoft.com> wrote: > >> For example, from reading different pages on how Clang PGO, it’s unclear if >> it does “block reordering” (i.e. moving unexecuted code blocks to a distant >> code page, leaving only ‘hot’

Hello - I'm an Engineer in Microsoft Office after looking into possible advantages of using PGO for our Android Applications. We at Microsoft have deep experience with Visual C++'s Profile Guided Optimization<https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/e7k32f4k.aspx> and often see 10% or more reduction in the size of application code loaded after using PGO for key scenarios (e.g.

On 05/27/2015 11:13 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >> On 2015 May 27, at 07:42, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Lee Hunt <leehu at exchange.microsoft.com> wrote: >> >>> For example, from reading different pages on how Clang PGO, it’s unclear if >>> it does “block reordering” (i.e. moving

> From: <betulb at codeaurora.org> > Date: Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM > Subject: [LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > > > Hi All, > > We had sent out an RFC in October on indirect call target profiling. The > proposal was about profiling target addresses seen at indirect call sites. > Using the profile data we're

This is yet another problem with the Nabble interface to the list. On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Richard M. Heiberger <rmh at temple.edu> wrote: > This line > > ?TT <- *Temp*+273.15 > makes it unexecutable. ?that is not the error you mentioned. On nabble, that variable is in bold. When it's reformatted for the plain-text email list, the formatting is converted to ** surrounding that bit of text. This is not helpful. Please note, this is an argument for NOT using nabble, rather than for convert...

Thanks! CIL [LeeHu] for a few comments… From: Xinliang David Li [mailto:xinliangli at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 9:29 AM To: Lee Hunt Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Capabilities of Clang's PGO (e.g. improving code density) On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Lee Hunt <leehu at exchange.microsoft.com<mailto:leehu at exchange.microsoft.com>> wrote:

> Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> writes: >>> From: <betulb at codeaurora.org> >>> Date: Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM >>> Subject: [LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure >>> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We had sent out an RFC in October on indirect call

I''ve been using RSpec in anger for perhaps a total of a few days and just started playing with Story Runner. Love it. I also started working on a patch, which ought to be simple, to allow for Scenarios without supplied blocks to be treated as pending -- much like "it" in Spec::DSL::ExampleAPI. That said, I noticed something that seemed odd and chatted with Rein

Hi, > > I think he means the lines like: > > > > switch (Opcode) { > > > > default: assert(0 && "Unknown load!"); > > > > > > where the default case is never executed. > > > I would personally appreciate expected to fail tests that ensure the > assertions actually catch the bad inputs that they were designed to

David, Yes, that is very helpful. Thanks! --randy From: Xinliang David Li [mailto:xinliangli at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 12:53 PM To: Randy Chapman Cc: Lee Hunt; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: FW: [LLVMdev] Capabilities of Clang's PGO (e.g. improving code density) On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Randy Chapman <randyc at microsoft.com<mailto:randyc at

Hi David! Thanks again for your help! I was wondering if you could clarify one thing for me? I find mention of “hot arc” optimization (-fprofile-arcs) , but I’m unclear if this is the same thing. Does Clang PGO do block reordering? It does reordering, but does not do splitting/partitioning. I take this to mean that PGO does block reordering within the function? I don’t see that the clang

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > > On 05/27/2015 11:13 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >>> >>> On 2015 May 27, at 07:42, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Lee Hunt <leehu at exchange.microsoft.com> >>> wrote:

Hi Betul, I've finally gotten around to going over this in detail - sorry for the delay, and thanks for working on this. I think that the general approach is a good one, and that this will end up working well. I have a couple of points on a high level, and I'll also send some review for the patches you've sent out. - The raw profile format does not need to be backwards compatible,

Hi, A feature I've wanted in lit for a while is a having a timeout per test. Attached are patches that implement this idea. I'm e-mailing llvm-dev rather than llvm-commits because I want to gather more feedback on my initial implementation and hopefully some answers to some unresolved issues with my implementation. Currently in lit you can set a global timeout for all of the tests but

Yes, thanks David! For the intra-procedural Basic Block Reordering, do you have any data as to how much improvement that gives speed-wise for any perf tests you’ve measured? I’m thinking this may speed things up for things like application launch by a couple %. For perf intensive code (e.g. spreadsheet recalc), I would expect it would be more. From: Randy Chapman Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015

...ake teh general protection > fault, then decode the instruction and interpret it if it''s trying to > access a -ve segment offset. > > Unfortunately the emulation triggers _a lot_! So it will affect > performance... > > However, I intend to add dynamic patching of the unexecutable > instructions to Linux -- it will detect instructions of a particular > limited class, and dynamically create fixup code, and patch the > original execution site to call the fixup code. > > I originally thought this would be very hard, but I think I have a way > of doing this in...

Hi, I have set up asterisk to run as non root, and allow admin users to log in to the server as asterisk, which gives them privileges to edit configs in the asterisk home directory. As for connecting to the console with 'asterisk -r' - this by default does not work as asterisk is owned stored in /usr/sbin/asterisk I am reading that the best way to solve this is to use 'visudo' -