search for: xrelease

Hi All, I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I propose to change LLVM/...

...ael On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 14:07 -0800, Michael Liao wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. > HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to > specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. > To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order > flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high > bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the > general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I pro...

...ael On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 14:07 -0800, Michael Liao wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. > HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to > specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. > To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order > flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high > bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the > general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I pro...

...ael On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 14:07 -0800, Michael Liao wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. > HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to > specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. > To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order > flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high > bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the > general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I pro...

Hi All, I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I propose to change LLVM/...

...11:52 AM, Michael Liao <michael.liao at intel.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to > specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order > flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I propose to > ch...

...o <michael.liao at intel.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I'd like to add HLE support in LLVM/clang consistent to GCC's style [1]. HLE from Intel TSX [2] is legacy compatible instruction set extension to >> specify transactional region by adding XACQUIRE and XRELEASE prefixes. To support that, GCC chooses the approach by extending the memory order >> flag in __atomic_* builtins with target-specific memory model in high bits (bit 31-16 for target-specific memory model, bit 15-0 for the general memory model.) To follow the similar approach, I propose to &gt...

I submitted a bug to the tracker *(*bug<http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=6947>) regarding the 256 character limit when copying a voicemail to a list of mail boxes. The bug was closed with this note: "Fixed in 1.2 branch, merged to trunk." Could someone explain to me what that means... in English? I searched the release notes of the newest asterisk version to see if this bug

Hi all, I've gotten asterisk installed on Debian only to realize that the packaged version is 1.0.7. Is there a reason why they're not up to a 1.2.x release? I'm building a system for production and I'm wondering if I should remain at this old version or if there are any serious issues with 1.2.13 on Debian? Should I be able to do an apt-get from unstable and get 1.2.13 and