Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "Opening "Printers" causes incoming packets from different ports"
2007 Jun 08
2
Logon scripts not working on all users
I have set up a logon script to run when users login. It works for me
when I log in, but my user ID is mapped to a root group as well as
administrative privileges. But it is not executing for regular users.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks in advance,
Boaz
logon script = stdlogon.bat
logon home =
logon path =
security = user
preferred master = yes
domain logons = yes
2007 Mar 16
3
Can't change password change dates with PDBEDIT
I'm setting up a Samba server using CentOS 4's (RedHat Enterprise Linux)
standard version (v.3.0101411). I want to be able to force users to
change their password upon first logging in and to have to change them
after a certain period of time (per user, not system-wide).
The problem is that the pdbedit commands don't seem to be registering at
all in the database. If I enter the
2006 Nov 09
3
Newbie looking to move from Netware to Linux/Samba
I'm looking to move my companies server from an old Netware 5.0 file
server to a Linux/Samba server on new hardware.
Since my companies' systems are not mission critical (I can afford to be
down for a few hours at a time after a switch-over) I feel I have the
tolerance for some problems in getting it installed.
Is this something I should be able to handle on my own (I installed the
NW
2008 Jan 04
3
Do I need Winbind?
With a recent upgrade to Centos 4.6 my system's Samba was also upgraded
to 3.0.25b. But now I get a series of
auth/auth_util.c:create_builtin_administrators(792) and
auth/auth_util.c:create_builtin_users(758) errors every day.
As I understand it winbind allows users to be logged in as Linux users
when they log in as Windows users. But since I don't want them to have
access to the
2012 Sep 12
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] SPIR provisional specification is now available in the Khronos website
Hi James,
This is very good feedback.
1. Adding the new calling conventions - It seems like the appropriate thing to do vs. metadata. Some OpenCL backends can choose to implement this calling convention and use it during code generation of OpenCL functions/kernels. Can we agree on this item?
2. Restricting the allowable instructions - As Micah mentioned before, the restrictions are there
2012 Sep 11
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] SPIR provisional specification is now available in the Khronos website
Hi James,
some additional comments regarding some of your questions:
Q: Is SPIR meant to be storage-only, or to allow optimizations to be done?
I agree with Micah that optimizing a SPIR module might make it less portable.
However, SPIR doesn't prohibit optimizations. It is up to the OpenCL optimizer to decide when to "materialize" SPIR to a device specific LLVM module or even
2012 Sep 12
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] SPIR provisional specification is now available in the Khronos website
Hi Boaz, David,
Thanks for taking my responses on board.
> 1. Adding the new calling conventions - It seems like the appropriate thing to do vs. metadata. Some OpenCL backends can choose to implement this calling convention and use it during code generation of OpenCL functions/kernels. Can we agree on this item?
Hmm, this is the one I was most shaky on. I still don't fully
understand
2012 Sep 06
2
[LLVMdev] "SPIR" ? A Standard Portable IR for OpenCL Kernel Language
On Sep 6, 2012, at 4:33 PM, "Ouriel, Boaz" <boaz.ouriel at intel.com> wrote:
> **** Introduction ****
> Lately, Khronos has ratified a new provisional specification which is called SPIR.
> This specification standardizes an intermediate representation for the OpenCL kernel language.
> It is based on LLVM infrastructure and this is why I am sending this mail to the
2009 Jan 28
2
[PATCH] fs: Add new pre-allocation ioctls to vfs for compatibility with legacy xfs ioctls
Al, Could this be included in the vfs queue?
This patch adds ioctls to vfs for compatibility with legacy XFS
pre-allocation ioctls (XFS_IOC_*RESVP*). The implementation
effectively invokes sys_fallocate for the new ioctls.
Also handles the compat_ioctl case.
Note: These legacy ioctls are also implemented by OCFS2.
Signed-off-by: Ankit Jain <me at ankitjain.org>
Reviewed-by: Christoph
2012 Sep 12
2
[LLVMdev] SPIR Portability Discussion
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Smith
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:55 PM
To: Ouriel, Boaz
Cc: cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] SPIR Portability Discussion
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ouriel, Boaz <boaz.ouriel at intel.com<mailto:boaz.ouriel at intel.com>> wrote:
Hey
2012 Sep 11
4
[LLVMdev] SPIR provisional specifciation is now available in the Khronos website
Hi All,
In continuation of the previous SPIR introduction email here is a link to the specification:
http://www.khronos.org/registry/cl/specs/spir_spec-1.0-provisional.pdf
The first topic which we would like to discuss is "SPIR portability".
I will send soon an additional mail which will help in leading the discussion on this topic.
Thanks and happy reading,
Boaz
-----Original
2012 Sep 12
0
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] SPIR provisional specification is now available in the Khronos website
Hi Boaz, Micah,
Thanks for the followup.
> I agree with Micah that optimizing a SPIR module might make it less portable.
> However, SPIR doesn't prohibit optimizations. It is up to the OpenCL optimizer to decide when to "materialize" SPIR to a device specific LLVM module or even convert it to another IR.
> It would be useful if we could identify areas in the specification
2012 Sep 12
0
[LLVMdev] SPIR Portability Discussion
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Villmow, Micah <Micah.Villmow at amd.com>wrote:
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Richard Smith
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:55 PM
> *To:* Ouriel, Boaz
> *Cc:* cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> *Subject:* Re:
2012 Sep 11
0
[LLVMdev] SPIR provisional specifciation is now available in the Khronos website
Hi Boaz,
I have a couple of specific questions:
(a) You mention special calling conventions and adding them to LLVM.
What are their semantics? And what is their purpose?
(b) Why disallow type conversion for vector types? (ss. 3.3)
Cheers,
James
On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 12:56 +0100, Ouriel, Boaz wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> In continuation of the previous SPIR introduction email here is a link
2012 Sep 11
2
[LLVMdev] SPIR provisional specifciation is now available in the Khronos website
> -----Original Message-----
> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu]
> On Behalf Of James Molloy
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 8:49 AM
> To: Ouriel, Boaz
> Cc: cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] SPIR provisional specifciation is now available
> in the Khronos website
>
> Hi Boaz,
>
2012 Sep 12
0
[LLVMdev] SPIR Portability Discussion
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Ouriel, Boaz <boaz.ouriel at intel.com>wrote:
> Hey All,
>
> This is a very big topic in SPIR and probably a very controversial one as
> well. It includes dealing with 32 vs. 64 bit architectures and OpenCL "C"
> endianness.
> We have written down some of the aspects, but of course did not cover
> everything - let's start
2012 Sep 14
1
[LLVMdev] SPIR Portability Discussion - Endianess
Hi All,
I would like to open up the discussion on the Host and Device Endianness section of the SPIR portability topic.
Please read below section number 2 and send your comments.
Thanks,
Boaz
-----Original Message-----
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Ouriel, Boaz
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 22:27
To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu;
2012 Sep 12
5
[LLVMdev] SPIR Portability Discussion
Hey All,
This is a very big topic in SPIR and probably a very controversial one as well. It includes dealing with 32 vs. 64 bit architectures and OpenCL "C" endianness.
We have written down some of the aspects, but of course did not cover everything - let's start a discussion on the portability and see where it takes us.
I suggest we start with the 32 vs. 64 bits discussion and then
2012 Sep 06
0
[LLVMdev] "SPIR" ? A Standard Portable IR for OpenCL Kernel Language
> -----Original Message-----
> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu]
> On Behalf Of Vikram Adve
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 3:52 PM
> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] "SPIR" ? A Standard Portable IR for OpenCL
> Kernel Language
>
> On Sep 6, 2012, at 4:33 PM, "Ouriel, Boaz"
2011 Dec 14
1
[LLVMdev] A Question about LLVM structures - alignment of data members
Hi All,
Today, LLVM IR doesn't include a description for alignment for specific data members inside structures.
The implies that LLVM IR Generators need to do the padding themselves in order to achieve the requested alignment.
Since the information is not represented explicitly by the LLVM IR, optimization passes might unintentionally break the required alignment and lead to unexpected