search for: wrc

...com/site/cvs but I understan it... i mean I entered in the console: export CVSROOT=:pserver:cvs@cvs.winehq.org:/home/wine cvs login everything fine then i entered: cvs -z 3 checkout wine and I get something like this (this is the end after it stopped doing "something"): U wine/tools/wrc/genres.h U wine/tools/wrc/newstruc.c U wine/tools/wrc/newstruc.h U wine/tools/wrc/parser.h U wine/tools/wrc/parser.l U wine/tools/wrc/parser.y U wine/tools/wrc/readres.c U wine/tools/wrc/readres.h U wine/tools/wrc/translation.c U wine/tools/wrc/utils.c U wine/tools/wrc/utils.h U wine/tools/wrc/wrc....

...02:55:10PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > >>> > > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > > >>>transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > > >>>another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. > > >>I don't see any reliable way to fit WR...

...02:55:10PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > >>> > > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > > >>>transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > > >>>another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. > > >>I don't see any reliable way to fit WR...

On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >>> >>> The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be >>> transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to >>> another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. >> I don't see any reliable way to fit WRC+addr+addr into "DATA...

On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >>> >>> The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be >>> transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to >>> another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. >> I don't see any reliable way to fit WRC+addr+addr into "DATA...

...;. Local ordering is NOT enough. It happens that current > > MIPS R6 doesn't require in your example smp_read_barrier_depends() > > but in discussion it comes out that it may not. Because without > > smp_read_barrier_depends() your example can be a part of Will's > > WRC+addr+addr and we found some design which easily can bump into > > this test. And that design actually performs "local ordering for > > address and data dependencies" too. > > As noted in another email in this thread, I do not believe that > WRC+addr+addr needs to be...

...;. Local ordering is NOT enough. It happens that current > > MIPS R6 doesn't require in your example smp_read_barrier_depends() > > but in discussion it comes out that it may not. Because without > > smp_read_barrier_depends() your example can be a part of Will's > > WRC+addr+addr and we found some design which easily can bump into > > this test. And that design actually performs "local ordering for > > address and data dependencies" too. > > As noted in another email in this thread, I do not believe that > WRC+addr+addr needs to be...

...Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > > > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > > > > >>>transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > > > > >>>another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. > > > > >>I don't...

...Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > > > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > > > > >>>transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > > > > >>>another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. > > > > >>I don't...

Whoops. Sorry about that. I wasn't supposed to actually have that as a reply, it was meant to be another top-level post. To summarise, wrc in the Mandriva wine-1.1.0 RPM available from Sourceforge conflicts with the name of "wrc" in openwatcom, which is also a Win32 resource compiler. Cheers, The Viking, Flying Brick Systems.

...nney wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > > > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > > > >>>transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > > > >>>another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. > > > >>I don't see any reliabl...

...* 172.21.11.0/24 - Linux servers * 172.21.110.0/24 - Test PCs (Win7 x64) * 172.18.224.0/20 - Production PCs (Win7 x64) * 204.133.165.0/24 (treated as an internal network, don't ask) - Old server subnet And the specific machines I'll be discussing are: * 172.21.11.24 - Samba server (wrc-deploy) * 172.21.110.68 - My test PC (Win7 x64) * 204.133.165.24 - Old Windows 2000 server So from another Linux server, on the same subnet (broadcast domain), I can do the following without a problem: jheese at wrc-aptcache1:~$ smbclient -NL wrc-deploy Domain=[WELDCORCC] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samb...

I need some time to understand your test examples. However, On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. I don't see any reliable way to fit WRC+addr+addr into "DATA DEPENDENCY BARRIERS&qu...

I need some time to understand your test examples. However, On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. I don't see any reliable way to fit WRC+addr+addr into "DATA DEPENDENCY BARRIERS&qu...

...l Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:28:45AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:54:01AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:24:32AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > See my earlier reply [1] (but also, your WRC Linux example looks more > > > > like a variant on WWC and I couldn't really follow it). > > > > > > I will revisit my WRC Linux example. And yes, creating litmus tests > > > that use non-fake dependencies is still a bit of an undertaking. :-/ > >...

...l Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:28:45AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 09:54:01AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:24:32AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > See my earlier reply [1] (but also, your WRC Linux example looks more > > > > like a variant on WWC and I couldn't really follow it). > > > > > > I will revisit my WRC Linux example. And yes, creating litmus tests > > > that use non-fake dependencies is still a bit of an undertaking. :-/ > >...

I need some help. I have downloaded the latest WINE tarball (731) and managed to get through the ./configure stage, installing rpms as needed. However, when WINE installs it gives me these set of errors: "cd `dirname wrc/__depend__` && make depend make[2]: Entering directory `/mnt/windows/Vault/Wine/wine/wine-20010731/tools/wr c' yacc -bppy -ppp -d -t ./ppy.y make[2]: yacc: Command not found make[2]: *** [ppy.tab.c] Error 127 make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/windows/Vault/Wine/wine/wine-20010731/tools/w...

...ave tried altering the settings for the type and interval arguments but without success. (I am running R v 2.10.1). Thank you for your help. Regards, Andrew Davey Senior Consultant Tel: + 44 (0) 1793 865023 Mob: +44 (0) 7747 863190 Fax: + 44 (0) 1793 865001 E-mail: andrew.davey@wrcplc.co.uk Website: www.wrcplc.co.uk P Before printing, please think about the environment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To read our latest newsletter visit http://www.wrcplc.co.uk/default.aspx?item=835 - Keeping our clients up-to-date w...

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Leonid Yegoshin wrote: > On 01/14/2016 01:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > >>On 01/14/2016 12:34 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >>> > >>>The WRC+addr+addr is OK because data dependencies are not required to be > >>>transitive, in other words, they are not required to flow from one CPU to > >>>another without the help of an explicit memory barrier. > >>I don't see any reliable way to fit WRC+addr+addr int...

...address and data dependencies". Local ordering is NOT enough. It happens that current MIPS R6 doesn't require in your example smp_read_barrier_depends() but in discussion it comes out that it may not. Because without smp_read_barrier_depends() your example can be a part of Will's WRC+addr+addr and we found some design which easily can bump into this test. And that design actually performs "local ordering for address and data dependencies" too. - Leonid.