similar to: [LLVMdev] Minor Fixes

Author: arao Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: 23068fce6f00ebb6cae9ea048d1680d4b6bec6ff Log message: 6291901 minor memory leak and misc fixes in vnex_add_intr and qcn_remove_intr 6303260 md size changes causes Solaris to panic. can''t boot the system Files: update: usr/src/uts/sun4v/io/qcn.c update: usr/src/uts/sun4v/io/vnex.c update: usr/src/uts/sun4v/os/mach_cpu_states.c

On 3/22/16 11:15 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal wrote: > Sir, > I am interested in adding a new analysis or optimization pass and > building the getting started guide as a project for gsoc. Okay. Decide which of these two projects you'd like to propose and write up a description of the project. Be sure to include some details. For example, if you're going to improve the

Sir, I am interested in add a new pass. I have read about analysis, transformation passes. Can you help me with some example ideas? On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:39 AM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/22/16 11:15 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal wrote: > > Sir, > I am interested in adding a new analysis or optimization pass and building > the getting started guide as a

On 3/17/16 10:58 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal wrote: > No i have not worked previously on llvm. I have looked through the > projects but because of no prior experience i am unable to pick one. I > am currently going through the llvm tutorials. I would recommend a project that has you working at the LLVM IR level. Fixing bugs or adding a new analysis or optimization pass may be a good

# HG changeset patch # User john.levon@sun.com # Date 1161090130 25200 # Node ID afeef751f9dafa771726bcfb00b29a10b0baeabd # Parent 7147e57f18552bbb8d25155cc1c635315283ee31 On Solaris, GCC is configured to use Sun''s LD. Fix the build to use the correct flags, and link against libsocket where necessary. Signed-off-by: John Levon <john.levon@sun.com> diff --git a/config/Linux.mk

Sir, I am interested in adding a new analysis or optimization pass and building the getting started guide as a project for gsoc. On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 1:29 AM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/17/16 10:58 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal wrote: > > No i have not worked previously on llvm. I have looked through the > projects but because of no prior experience i am

Hi all, again, I'm not knowledgeable about Kerberos, but we have a few users who use it to make sure that it works well on Solaris... so, they would like a Kerberized IMAPd. I tried compiling dovecot --with-gssapi on Solaris Nevada (the current development release), and the configure script choked for a couple of reasons. First, script uses 'grep -qv' in the case that you specify

No i have not worked previously on llvm. I have looked through the projects but because of no prior experience i am unable to pick one. I am currently going through the llvm tutorials. On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:32 PM, John Criswell <jtcriswel at gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/8/16 10:12 AM, Om Shivom Nagpal via llvm-dev wrote: > > Hi, I am Om Shivom pursuing CSE from PEC University of

Dear Nick and LLVM-DEV, This morning I commited changes to both the prerelease-10 branch and mainline. These changes fix the bug found on Solaris where constructors of static global variables are not executed when a dynamic library is dlopened(). The fix updates libtool to 1.5 and modifies it so that it always selects the -G option when linking on Solaris with GCC. Makefile.common has

Alexander Friedman wrote: > On May 17, John Criswell wrote: > >>Dear All, >> >>I've finished building binaries for the GCC frontends and am now testing >> the 1.5 release branch on i386/Linux, Sparc/Solaris, and PowerPC/MacOS X. >> >>I'm looking for volunteers to test LLVM 1.5 on platforms that we don't >>have in house. I'm

Good suggestions - you are right that we only have issues when a VM is in transition so simply removing it from the returned list should be fine. Turns out that this also means the collectors don''t need to return special codes either - they are back to either working (and potentially pruning a domain from the list) or failing completely. Patch attached (boy, this is taking waaay more

Hi, In migrating from **VM to ZFS am I going to have an issue with Major/Minor numbers with NFS mounts? Take the following scenario. 1. NFS clients are connected to an active NFS server that has SAN shared storage between the active and standby nodes in a cluster. 2. The NFS clients are using the major/minor numbers on the active node in the cluster to communicate to the NFS active server. 3.

The actual size of even a MC instruction will change during relaxation--we don't choose between 8-bit jumps and wider jumps until relaxation. You can get the actual encoding of an MCInst via MCCodeEmitter, but if you expect relaxation to occur, or particularly if you're testing before register allocation, the size could only be an estimate and shouldn't be trusted for exact size.

Asterisk Project Security Advisory - AST-2009-005 +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Product | Asterisk | |---------------------+--------------------------------------------------| | Summary | Remote Crash Vulnerability in SIP channel driver |

Asterisk Project Security Advisory - AST-2009-005 +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Product | Asterisk | |---------------------+--------------------------------------------------| | Summary | Remote Crash Vulnerability in SIP channel driver |

For ISO C++ we long ago created an 'all' list for topics that were organisational and not technically specific to an aspect of the Standard such as Library, or Core, or Extensions, etc.. For the most part I think that since the early 1990s when these lists started, the 'all' reflector/distribution-list has worked really well. I still get all the ISO C++ mailings, and the signal

Can you tell me where pass_1 is defined? You have used it inside getAnalysis<pass_1>(). Is it the name we generally give to a pass while registry? In this case, don't I need to use getAnalysisUsage (AnalysisUsage &AU) function? On 20 July 2010 02:55, John Criswell <criswell at uiuc.edu> wrote: > Soumya_Prasad_Ukil wrote: > >> >> In LLVM, we generally

The website isn't working for me. -bw On Jul 24, 2006, at 9:49 PM, Evan Cheng wrote: > CVS isn't working for me still. Anyone else having problem? > > Evan > On Jul 24, 2006, at 8:16 PM, John Criswell wrote: > >> Evan Cheng wrote: >>> Any idea when it would be back up? We are in release crunch mode >>> here. Not having access to the CVS server is

Dear Nick, We've figured out what is going on with your "Hello World" pass and have implemented a temporary solution. Basically, our build rules in Makefile.common built shared objects with the Solaris linker (via libtool). While it built the shared library, the library did not call C++ constructors of global variables. This, in turn, caused the pass registration to fail.

On 7/29/11 10:00 AM, david.dewey at comcast.net wrote: > > John, > > Thanks for the quick reply. Using a PassManager object should work > fine. As you said, my only objection is to exec'ing opt. > > I had actually tried instantiating a PassManager object before, but I > was definitely not doing it right. I will take a look at how clang > and SAFECode use it,