similar to: pkg-xen-changes: max. mailsize possible?

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "pkg-xen-changes: max. mailsize possible?"

2006 Feb 16
1
r3 - trunk
Author: acid Date: 2006-02-16 10:45:13 +0000 (Thu, 16 Feb 2006) New Revision: 3 Modified: trunk/changelog trunk/control Log: - Change maintainer and add uploaders field - Prepare changelog for new upload Modified: trunk/changelog =================================================================== --- trunk/changelog 2006-02-15 23:05:09 UTC (rev 2) +++ trunk/changelog 2006-02-16 10:45:13
2010 Dec 01
2
[LLVMdev] Register Pairing
Jeff thanks for those suggestions, that's exactly what i would like to do, however i dont know how to do it with my current knowledge :\ As far as i understand patterns only take one instruction as an input (while the pattern you wrote before takes two) and also, i dont know how to handle register copying (COPY) in the .td file because they're handled in a different way to the rest of
2019 Mar 07
5
Writing unit tests - how to test re-orderable blocks...
We have a test that looks like this… define void @array16_store() { ; CHECK-LABEL: array16_store: ; CHECK: ldi [[REG1:r[0-9]+]], 204 ; CHECK: ldi [[REG2:r[0-9]+]], 170 ; CHECK: sts int.array+3, [[REG2]] ; CHECK: sts int.array+2, [[REG1]] ; CHECK: ldi [[REG1:r[0-9]+]], 187 ; CHECK: ldi [[REG2:r[0-9]+]], 170 ; CHECK: sts int.array+1, [[REG2]] ; CHECK: sts int.array, [[REG1]] ; CHECK: ldi
2019 Mar 08
2
Writing unit tests - how to test re-orderable blocks...
I’m not sure if it’s truly deterministic. It always gives the same results (so far) on my machine but I’m not sure that’s enough. My guess is it’s probably going to be deterministic on one machine but might well not be deterministic across environments. Like it might give varying results if cross compiled on different hosts, macOS vs intel Linux vs arm vs s390. (Obviously AVR is always a cross
2006 Sep 13
2
ports / www/linux-seamonkey / flashplugin vulnerability
Hi! Since linux-flashplugin7 r63 is vulnerable according to http://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/7c75d48c-429b-11db-afae-000c6ec775d9.html isn't www/linux-seamonkey vulerable, too (it seems to include 7 r25)? Bye Arne __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
2010 Nov 27
3
[LLVMdev] Register Pairing
Hello, some months ago i wrote to the mailing list asking some questions about register pairing, i've been experimenting several things with the help i got back then. Some background first: this issue is for a backend for an 8bit microcontroller with only 8bit regs, however it has a few 16bit instructions that only work with fixed register pairs, so it doesnt allow all combinations of regs.
2010 Nov 29
0
[LLVMdev] Register Pairing
On Nov 27, 2010, at 8:56 AM, Borja Ferrer wrote: > Some background first: this issue is for a backend for an 8bit microcontroller with only 8bit regs, however it has a few 16bit instructions that only work with fixed register pairs, so it doesnt allow all combinations of regs. This introduces some problems because if data wider than 8bits is expanded into 8bit operations the 16bit instructions
2011 Mar 26
2
[LLVMdev] Possible missed optimization?
> > You can look at the output of -debug-only=regcoalescing to see what is > going on. > > This is the debug output i've got, some information is a bit cryptic for me so next is what i understood: ********** SIMPLE REGISTER COALESCING ********** ********** Function: foo ********** JOINING INTERVALS *********** entry: 16L %vreg0<def> = COPY %R25R24<kill>;
2006 Feb 18
1
r24 - trunk/debian/patches
Author: tha-guest Date: 2006-02-18 22:55:21 +0000 (Sat, 18 Feb 2006) New Revision: 24 Removed: trunk/debian/patches/30rename-pae-hypervisor.dpatch Log: Guido found a better way to have the pae hypervisor installed with another name without patching upstream and it seems to work as good as the patched upstream version, so I removed my patch from svn again. There seems to be no need to just
2012 Oct 25
1
parallel processing with foreach
Hi, I am trying to parallel computing with foreach function, but not able to get the result. I know that in parallel processing, all result is collected in list format, but I am not able to get input there. Any help is really appreciated. esf.m <-foreach (i = 1:n.s, .combine=rbind) %dopar% { EV <- as.data.frame(eig$vectors[,1:n.candid[i]]) colnames(EV) <- paste("EV",
2006 Feb 19
1
r26 - in trunk/debian: . patches
Author: ultrotter Date: 2006-02-19 18:38:10 +0000 (Sun, 19 Feb 2006) New Revision: 26 Added: trunk/debian/patches/30xenchangeset.dpatch Modified: trunk/debian/patches/00list trunk/debian/patches/10sysconfig.dpatch trunk/debian/rules Log: Add 10sysconfig.dpatch description Add 30xenchangeset.dpatch to make the xen changeset configurable Force the xen changeset to be the correct one
2006 Feb 17
1
r9 - trunk/debian
Author: ultrotter Date: 2006-02-17 06:56:29 +0000 (Fri, 17 Feb 2006) New Revision: 9 Modified: trunk/debian/changelog trunk/debian/control Log: Change the version and debian revision, as agreed on the ML Start tracking the bugs that need to be closed on upload Modified: trunk/debian/changelog =================================================================== --- trunk/debian/changelog
2006 Mar 02
1
upgrade report (2.0.6 -> 3.0-testing+pkgxen)
Hi, so here is finally my upgrade report for my testsystem. I tried to upgrade to xen3 while xen2 (hypervisor, dom0 kernel + 1 domU) was running: 1) if xen2 (adams latest packages in this case) were installed and we would release our package as it is, we would generate the following enviorment: # apt-get upgrade -u Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done The following
2011 Mar 28
0
[LLVMdev] Possible missed optimization?
On Mar 26, 2011, at 4:09 PM, Borja Ferrer wrote: > You can look at the output of -debug-only=regcoalescing to see what is going on. > > This is the debug output i've got, some information is a bit cryptic for me so next is what i understood: > > ********** SIMPLE REGISTER COALESCING ********** > ********** Function: foo > ********** JOINING INTERVALS *********** >
2010 Dec 05
1
[LLVMdev] Register Pairing
Hello Lang, thanks for the suggestion :) it's very interesting. I'll take a read to the email you've pointed out there to understand how it works. Btw, does this mean that only your allocator is able to handle or support this type of constraint? As a follow up to my previous email, the following code is a real example of what i was explaining, Lang this example is exactly why i need
2004 Mar 02
1
Immediate crash on Mac OS X 10.2.8
Hello, I don't know very much about Macs, so may have missed some obvious steps, but I downloaded version 1.8.1 of RAqua.dmg and installed from the R package file. The Start R icon appeared in the applications directory, but crashed immediately on opening. Here is the log file: Date/Time: 2004-03-03 08:32:27 +1100 OS Version: 10.2.8 (Build 6R73) Host: Kylie-Kings-Computer.local.
2010 Dec 02
0
[LLVMdev] Register Pairing
Hi Borja, > Without doing what i mentioned and letting LLVM expand all operations wider > than 8 bits as you asked, the code produced is excellent supposing that many > of the moves there should be 16 bit moves reducing code size and right > register allocation, also something important for me is that the code is > better than gcc's. When i say right reg allocation it doesnt
2011 Mar 26
0
[LLVMdev] Possible missed optimization?
On Mar 26, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Borja Ferrer wrote: > Hello Jakob, thanks for the reply. The three regclasses involved here are all subsets from each other and aren't disjoint. These are the basic descriptions of the regclasses involved to show what i mean: > > DREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R1R0 (16 regs) > DLDREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R17R16 (8 regs) > PTRREGS:
2011 Mar 26
2
[LLVMdev] Possible missed optimization?
Hello Jakob, thanks for the reply. The three regclasses involved here are all subsets from each other and aren't disjoint. These are the basic descriptions of the regclasses involved to show what i mean: DREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R1R0 (16 regs) DLDREGS: R31R30, R29R28 down to R17R16 (8 regs) PTRREGS: R31R30, R29R28, R27R26 (3 regs) All classes intersect each other
2006 Mar 03
2
r70 - trunk/xen-3.0/debian
Author: tha-guest Date: 2006-03-03 18:08:48 +0000 (Fri, 03 Mar 2006) New Revision: 70 Modified: trunk/xen-3.0/debian/changelog trunk/xen-3.0/debian/control trunk/xen-3.0/debian/xen-utils-3.0.postinst Log: The "Sorry for the step back, but I guess it''s more a 2 steps forwards" commit - Added the xen package again, because we believe there is a valid upgrade