similar to: Execution problems with 3.4.p1 and 3.6.p1

All- Does anyone on the list have experience with building RODBC from source on a Linux box for use with DB2? I am using (all from source): R 2.0.1 unixODBC 2.2.9 RODBC 1.1-3 For example: [jcole]$ R CMD INSTALL RODBC_1.1-3.tar.gz 2> rodbc.log * Installing *source* package 'RODBC' ... checking for gcc... gcc checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out checking whether

On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Tom Roeder <tmroeder at google.com> wrote: > > > > I'm definitely interested in removing the inline asm bits. I'm not > > sure what you mean by a pseudo-plt, though; do you mean hooking into > > the code that generates the Procedure

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:28:52AM -0700, Tom Roeder wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Tom Roeder <tmroeder at google.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >

Dear R users, is there any possibility to get an object-name completion within the R command line (UNIX-version of R). As I got to know from the FAQ that this is possible from within Emacs (ESS), but without using Emacs? Thank's Ingo -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ingo Roeder Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology

> The way I've implemented it (see the patch I sent to llvm-commits > yesterday), it's not just metadata: the intrinsic lowers to the > jumptable entry code given above. The CFI pass then generates a > function for each jump table; the function consists solely of these > intrinsic calls. Well, the intrinsic you proposed has no effect on the caller and has non-local effects

On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Tom Roeder <tmroeder at google.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Richard Osborne <richard at xmos.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:54:07PM -0700, Tom Roeder wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > >> The way I've implemented it (see the patch I sent to llvm-commits > >> yesterday), it's not just metadata: the intrinsic lowers to the > >> jumptable entry code given above. The CFI pass then generates a

Hi, I'm trying to compile release 3.2 of DragonEgg (checked out from http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/dragonegg/branches/release_32. I'm at revision 170458), under Ubuntu (Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS (GNU/Linux 2.6.39-gcg-20121018 x86_64)) and I get the following error. tmroeder at myubuntu:~/src/dragonegg$ make Compiling utils/TargetInfo.cpp Linking TargetInfo Compiling Aliasing.cpp

On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 05:28:04PM -0700, Tom Roeder wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk>wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:54:07PM -0700, Tom Roeder wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > > wrote: > > > >> The way I've implemented it (see

On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 06:54:55PM -0700, Reid Kleckner wrote: > I think it's a little scary to assume things about LLVM's x86 code > generation. I haven't really finished the codegen side of the change, but > I'm pretty sure in it's current state it will emit extra loads and stores, > even if they are unnecessary. Right, I had similar concerns. Now that I've

Hi Tom, DragonEgg depends on GCC's and LLVM's internal headers, auto-host.h is one of them. Try to add GCC and LLVM_CONFIG with your make command as described here http://dragonegg.llvm.org/ in section "Getting it". Best, - Dima. On 12/18/2012 10:24 PM, Tom Roeder wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to compile release 3.2 of DragonEgg (checked out from >

Thanks for the followup. If I understand the suggestion correctly, this doesn't solve the problem of building a jump table to call into other functions, since, as you note, indirectbr can only call into blocks in the same function. Is the conclusion then that there is no way to do this in LLVM IR? It looks like these kind of restrictions (no branching between functions and no instructions

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Richard Osborne <richard at xmos.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 11 Feb 2014, at 08:15, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: >> >>

On 11 Feb 2014, at 08:15, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> IIRC this came up before, and I don't think we expose anything like a jump >> table at the IR level. As an IR-to-IR transform, I think asm is the only >> way to do it. >

Hi, I'm currently writing an opt module for fast indirect call checks using a table of allowed indirect call targets. The code replaces function pointers with offsets into the table then masks the offset for the table size and restores the function pointer before the call. I have some ways of dealing with some kinds of external code that are sufficient for my use case but not for more general

Hi, In my work applying -flto to Chrome, I need to set some names to be skipped by the InternalizePass; otherwise, the linking stage fails (i.e., when building the chrome binary). In the past, I had a tiny patch that I hadn't submitted to LLVM: it was something like: Index: Internalize.cpp =================================================================== --- Internalize.cpp (revision

Hi, I suggest add the id attribute for each <h2> tag in www/index.html. Thus we can refer to the "Getting it" section in the dragonegg homepage page (the only web page) by simply the given URL: http://dragonegg.llvm.org#GettingIt Regards. On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Dmitry Mikushin <dmitry at kernelgen.org>wrote: > Hi Tom, > > DragonEgg depends on GCC's

On 1/2/2013 11:05 AM, Tom Roeder wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently writing an opt module for fast indirect call checks > using a table of allowed indirect call targets. The code replaces > function pointers with offsets into the table then masks the offset > for the table size and restores the function pointer before the call. > I have some ways of dealing with some kinds of

Hello all, I''m attempting to test/tune a mongrel cluster according to the tuning instructions on the mongrel site (using httperf). Anecdotally, the site itself ''feels'' snappy, but testing it with httperf reveals what appears to be terrible throughput. I''m kind of at a loss to describe the results, and was hoping someone could verify that I''m testing

AFAIK, this won't work: the way I want to use a jump table requires me to get a pointer into the table that I can use as a function pointer to call the original function in a normal call instruction. If I just add a new basic block in some containing function with a call instruction and somehow get a pointer to that instruction, then this does satisfy the goal of putting the new instructions