search for: verified

...on and verifying module level debug info in doFinalization. But it can be time consuming (see email discussion in "Debug Info Slowing Things Down?!"), since each function can reach a lot of debug info MDNodes, some of them are shared between functions. One possibility is to cache MDNodes verified by one function so other functions do not verify those MDNodes again. But this is a violation of Function Pass in my opinion, since other optimization passes can run between verifying one function and verifying another function, and the MDNodes verified by one function can be modified when verifyin...

...info in doFinalization. But it can be time consuming (see email discussion >> in "Debug Info Slowing Things Down?!"), since each function can reach a lot >> of debug info MDNodes, some of them are shared between functions. >> >> One possibility is to cache MDNodes verified by one function so other >> functions do not verify those MDNodes again. But this is a violation of >> Function Pass in my opinion, since other optimization passes can run >> between verifying one function and verifying another function, and the >> MDNodes verified by one fu...

...level debug > info in doFinalization. But it can be time consuming (see email discussion > in "Debug Info Slowing Things Down?!"), since each function can reach a lot > of debug info MDNodes, some of them are shared between functions. > > One possibility is to cache MDNodes verified by one function so other > functions do not verify those MDNodes again. But this is a violation of > Function Pass in my opinion, since other optimization passes can run > between verifying one function and verifying another function, and the > MDNodes verified by one function can be mo...

Rowland, thank you for answering! I have investigated this a bit, and I think that using 18.04 for the new DC will not be successful anyway. Reasons: the AD I have has been created back in the days when 14.04 LTS was fresh. The provisioning scripts worked differently. 14.04 has been upgraded to 16.04, and I think that I do not have all of the DNSes configured properly and this might be the cause

Hi, Is there any easy way to run the verifier between each pass in opt if I do e.g. opt -O3 foo.ll -o foo.opt.ll ? If I add -verify after -O3 I get one invocation of the verifier first in the FunctionPass manager and then get two (!) runs of the verifier after all other passes are run. Then I saw the flag -verify-each which sounds promising, the help text says - Verify after each

Further to my previous email, I now have some answers. The culprit is the IR verifier. 1. opt -time-passes does not report time spent in the IR verifier. If I add -disable-verify, opt's run time drops from 71 seconds to 37 seconds. 2. -disable-verify doesn't disable all verification runs. The IR verifier is run 3 times: once prior to any optimization work, once between running the

yes, I tried working with samba wiki and quad-verifying what is recommended to be checked. OK, I'll try to join using 18.04. the samba_dnsupdate tool does not have the --use-samba-tool option in ubuntu 16.04 2018-04-25 22:47 GMT+02:00 Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>: > On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:32:10 +0200 > Jakub Kulesza <jakkul+samba at gmail.com> wrote:

Hello all, I came across the code of Verifier, and see that it doesn't modify the IR at all. Why it is not considered as an analysis pass? Actually, this will have impact on debugify-each and print-before/after-all: we are not supposed to print/debugify Verifier pass, but since Verifier is declared as a transformation (well, a non-analysis) pass, we actually do print/debugify it. Thanks for

On Wed, 25 Apr 2018 22:32:10 +0200 Jakub Kulesza <jakkul+samba at gmail.com> wrote: > Rowland, thank you for answering! > > I have investigated this a bit, and I think that using 18.04 for the > new DC will not be successful anyway. Reasons: the AD I have has been > created back in the days when 14.04 LTS was fresh. The provisioning > scripts worked differently. 14.04 has

Hi llvm, 1) The lib/VMCore/Verifier.cpp in 2.7 implements Verifier::VerifyType, which is empty in 2.6. I noticed that it does not check all types, for example, UnionTyID, OpaqueTyID, LabelTyID, MetadataTyID and etc are ignored in the 'default' branch. Does it mean we dont need to check them? Another question is: How much does Verifier.cpp check statically? Can I take it as a type checker

On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:35 AM, David Blaikie wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jun 25, 2013, at 9:15 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> >> Any suggestion on how to move this

Hello, Is there anyway to disable the module verifier pass (in llvm-ld and llc)? I got an error as " Instruction does not dominate all uses!". Obviously, there must be something wrong. The module verifier simply aborts `llvm-ld` instead of generating bytecode. If somehow I can disable the module verifier, then I can use llc to produce LLVM assembly code for my program. This will help

Hi, I hope someone can help me with the following problem. I followed the following guides to setup samba as an additional active directory server to my windows server with bind9 dns: https://www.tecmint.com/join-additio...r-replication/<https://www.tecmint.com/join-additional-ubuntu-dc-to-samba4-ad-dc-failover-replication/>

Hi Anton, I ran llc with -verify-coalescing. There were no error messages. Then I added code in MipsPassConfig::addPreEmitPass() to prevent machine verifier from running post delay -slot-filler, and ran llc again. Again, there were no error messages. This is the list of passes run after post-RA scheduling. machine verifier is run twice after post RA scheduler (and CriticalAntiDepBreaker) is run.

Zheng Wang wrote: > Hello, > > Is there anyway to disable the module verifier pass (in llvm-ld and llc)? > > I got an error as " Instruction does not dominate all uses!". > Obviously, there must be something wrong. The module verifier simply > aborts `llvm-ld` instead of generating bytecode. If somehow I can > disable the module verifier, then I can use llc to

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6276 Summary: crtimes.patch does not preserve creation dates on Mac x86_64 only Product: rsync Version: 3.0.6 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org

John Criswell wrote: > Zheng Wang wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Is there anyway to disable the module verifier pass (in llvm-ld and llc)? >> >> I got an error as " Instruction does not dominate all uses!". >> Obviously, there must be something wrong. The module verifier simply >> aborts `llvm-ld` instead of generating bytecode. If somehow I can

Hi, Which version of Mac OS X are you running? If you are on Mac OS 10.5.x then I can only suggest that you try either formating the drive to HFS + or creating a disk image with an HFS+ file system. If you are running Mac OS 10.4.x then ensure that that ACL support is enabled on the drive. The following URL contains information on how to check and enable ACL support :

Hi, how can I use Rails ActionController::Verification#verify :params when the hash key is in a hash? E.g.: params[:form][:textfield] and I want to verify that :textfield is a key in params[:form] Thanks Markus

...rying to work-out this problem with not luck. I am working on a Linux Fedora 14. I ssh from the server to the client using teh IP with no problem. Client: # puppetd --server puppet --waitforcert 60 --test --verbose info: Creating a new SSL key for bar03 warning: peer certificate won''t be verified in this SSL session warning: peer certificate won''t be verified in this SSL session info: Creating a new SSL certificate request for bar03 warning: peer certificate won''t be verified in this SSL session warning: peer certificate won''t be verified in this SSL session warni...