search for: upending

...t part right now). I don't particularly want to put it >> on the module because of (admittedly pie in the sky) plans of being able to >> compile a module with two target machines at the same time. > > > Wait, what? The DataLayout can't live in the target machine without upending > the layering completely. Every part of the IR optimizer uses it... > Ha. And yet currently some of them are dependent upon subtarget features. I'm separating them out, but making them "ARM" or "X86" or what have you seems to be the best route. -eric

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Oct 19, 2014, at 1:22 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > > > I've just wasted a day chasing my tail because of subtleties introduced > to handle the optionality of the DataLayout. I would like to never do this > again. =] > > > > We now have

Top posting: So, I do want the five years of LTS in 18.04. {I think - see below.] A substantial reason I'm not using debian/devuan is LTS support. I'm glad to be schooled in that regard, if someone has arguments to make. But I generally want to install a VM/Server/Box for a client and leave it alone as much as possible for as long as possible, and while it still works as initially

On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 09:48:37 -0700 Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Top posting: > > So, I do want the five years of LTS in 18.04. {I think - see below.] > > A substantial reason I'm not using debian/devuan is LTS support. Debian has its own version of LTS: https://wiki.debian.org/LTS >I'm > glad to be schooled in that regard, if

...rly want to put it >>>> on the module because of (admittedly pie in the sky) plans of being able to >>>> compile a module with two target machines at the same time. >>> >>> >>> Wait, what? The DataLayout can't live in the target machine without upending >>> the layering completely. Every part of the IR optimizer uses it... >> >> Ha. And yet currently some of them are dependent upon subtarget >> features. I'm separating them out, but making them "ARM" or "X86" or >> what have you seems to be...

So, Louis - I'm quite interested in using your repo for Samba support on 18.04. You note there's some detail on it on the github site - but I don't seem to find it. Also - while I know it's all just best intentions etc - is this something you intend to do for a while? [I'd be glad to toss some $$$ your way to help, if that's helpful. I'd toss some bucks to SerNet - but

OK, I've been trying to read the vhost and vhost net code, and I'm struggling with basic questions. 1) Why do we allow userspace to change an already-set-up vhost device? Why not have: open() ioctl(VHOST_GET_FEATURES) ioctl(VHOST_SET_VRING) x n (sets num, addresses, kick/call/err fds) ioctl(VHOST_NET_SETUP) ... close() You're not

OK, I've been trying to read the vhost and vhost net code, and I'm struggling with basic questions. 1) Why do we allow userspace to change an already-set-up vhost device? Why not have: open() ioctl(VHOST_GET_FEATURES) ioctl(VHOST_SET_VRING) x n (sets num, addresses, kick/call/err fds) ioctl(VHOST_NET_SETUP) ... close() You're not