search for: visaversa

...gin(), E = IndirectPassManagers.end(); I != E; ++I) if (Pass *P = (*I)->findAnalysisPass(AID, false)) return P; This old post on the list : http://old.nabble.com/Array-Dependence-Analysis-td16073995.html says that "Loop passes can use function passes, but not visaversa." so as far as I can tell this should be OK. Am I doing something wrong? (perhaps ordering of the addRequired calls or the initialization macros?) Is there something else I need to add to allow the memdep pass to be required by LICM, or is this a bug? Many thanks, Dave ------------...

...ailable for some function-level pass then? > > We could extend pass manager framework to let function-level pass use > loop-level analysis info. However that is not ideal. I agree. I think the dependence analysis pass should be a FunctionPass. LoopPasses can use function passes, but not visaversa. -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

...e right way to go. This would significantly increase verbosity in the code and would be generally detrimental. As a solution for your problem, would something like this work? #include "llvm/Debug.h" #define LLVM_DEBUG(X) DEBUG(X) #undef DEBUG #include "DavidDebug.h" ... Or visaversa? -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

On Monday 07 July 2008 14:18, Chris Lattner wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, David Greene wrote: > >> Debug.h should only be #included by .cpp files, not .h files. Are you > >> seeing a case where you need to use both debug macros in a .cpp file? > > > > That's not the issue. We have some interface (.cpp) files that convert > > from our IR to LLVM IR.

On Mar 18, 2008, at 8:03 AM, Wojciech Matyjewicz wrote: > Hi, > > Devang Patel wrote: >> LLVM loop transformer operates at loop level, which is not what many >> optimizers do in general. So, a loop level interface (i.e. based on >> LoopPass in llvm) to find loop-carried dependence is preferable to >> loop optimizer. > > Do you mean making Array Dependence

Hi, Devang Patel wrote: > LLVM loop transformer operates at loop level, which is not what many > optimizers do in general. So, a loop level interface (i.e. based on > LoopPass in llvm) to find loop-carried dependence is preferable to > loop optimizer. Do you mean making Array Dependence Analysis a loop-level analysis? Would its results be available for some function-level pass

...gt; Do you see a repeated pattern of pass sequence the pass manager is trying to handle ? P->getPassName() is handy. - Devang > This old post on the list : > http://old.nabble.com/Array-Dependence-Analysis-td16073995.html says > that "Loop passes can use function passes, but not visaversa." > so as far as I can tell this should be OK. > > Am I doing something wrong? (perhaps ordering of the addRequired > calls or the initialization macros?) > Is there something else I need to add to allow the memdep pass to be > required by LICM, or is this a bug? > >...

Hai Ian, Can you run this one again on both servers and pm me both outputs. I'll have a good look. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/thctlo/samba4/master/samba-collect-debug-info.sh I've updated the file, so do use the new one. Greetz, Louis > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Ian > Coetzee via samba >

...nd, netbios prefferes to have these in CAPS. dig -x ip_of_server dig a FQDN dig a netbiosname.FQDN.  ( which should be, in my optionion, a CNAME to the origianal name. )     3) install acl also on the 4.5 server.   4) smb.conf The rid ranges, setup the 4.9 as the 4.5 is. Why this way.. and not visaversa. The samba defaults start at ID 10000 thats why, nothing else.   the 4.9 smb.conf , add : yes these might be defaults but if a default changes, your always safe because you definded them.          winbind nss info = template          template shell = /bin/bash          template homedir = /home/%...

...search : office1.example.tld Dhcp settings Loc 2: Dns suffix : office2.example.tld Dns search : office2.example.tld If you want to be able to use the hostnames only without domainnames. Ping dc1 on location1, resolves to dc1.office1.example.tld Ping dc1 on location2, fails on location 2 And visaversa same problem. Now, if you change Dns search on location 2 to : office2.example.tld office1.example.tld Then ping dc1 , resolves to dc1.office1.example.tld Do note, if the name DC1 also exist in the dns of location 2, then that one resolves. Choose your hostnames wisely. If you prepaird a PC...

Mandi! Rowland Penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > This is probably where you are going wrong. AD lives and dies on DNS, > your DC MUST be authoritative for the AD domain. ...but *is* authoritative! Simply DHCP server assign the ''old'' DNS, where all resolution fr the AD (sub)domain are forwarded to AD DNS... > Your AD clients should be using the DC as