similar to: [LLVMdev] missed optimizations

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Nuno Lopes <nunoplopes at sapo.pt> wrote: > Hi, > > I have two questions about optimizations performed by llvm. > > Consider these simple functions: > int x(int b) { return b?4:6; } > int y() { return x(0); } > > int x2() { return 5; } > int y2() { return x2(); } > > the optimized bitcode (with clang + opt

Hi, I have two questions about optimizations performed by llvm. Consider these simple functions: int x(int b) { return b?4:6; } int y() { return x(0); } int x2() { return 5; } int y2() { return x2(); } the optimized bitcode (with clang + opt -std-compiler-opts) is: define i32 @y(...) nounwind { entry: ret i32 6 } define i32 @y2(...) nounwind { entry: %call = call i32 (...)* @x2( ) ;

Hi. reading docs i found THIS pdbedit -P "minimum password age" -C 5184000 (limit for validity of the password set for 60 days) pdbedit -P "maximum password age" -C 7776000 (maximum period for validity of the password set for 90 days) after u set ur policies restart samba and cofirm policies/informations make to user: pdbedit -L -v samba_user AND THIS -P account-policy

From: Rowland Penny <rowlandpenny at googlemail.com> To: samba at lists.samba.org Cc: Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:03:54 +0100 Subject: Re: [Samba] I getting some erros about SPNs and main process ended, respawning On 30/07/14 14:38, Claudio Renato Cardoso wrote: > Please I getting some erros about SPNs and main process ended respawing, > bellow the erros that ia m getting at messages

----- Mensagem encaminhada por zynkx <skydive@megamail.pt> ----- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:25:26 +0000 From: zynkx <skydive@megamail.pt> Reply-To: zynkx <skydive@megamail.pt> Subject: smbspool To: samba@lists.samba.org i am using this command line from a linux client to try to print to my linux samba server with a shared printer, that is printing ok from windows clients. the

Every time I send an e-mail to the * list, I receive this "AntiSpam UOL" E-mail. is anybody else experiencing the same? How can I get rid of it? Uriel -----Original Message----- From: AntiSpam UOL [mailto:andersoncbr.sspam@uol.com.br] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 11:51 PM To: uriel@adelphia.net Subject: RE:RE: [Asterisk-Users] SIP / GrandStream Configuration Ol?,

Woooow! Kick this guy out from this list and pls filter *@uol.com.br It's very annoying.... Isamar ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:48:45 -0300 (BRT) From: AntiSpam UOL <andersoncbr.sspam@uol.com.br> To: isamar@isamarmaia.org Subject: RE:RE: [Asterisk-Users] G729 experiences.. [antispam_txt.gif] Ol=E1, Voc=EA enviou uma mensagem para

All, seems I too am suffering from posts to the list and being accused of SPAMing .... -----Original Message----- From: AntiSpam UOL [mailto:andersoncbr.sspam@uol.com.br] Sent: 26 September 2003 20:48 To: alow@prioritytelecom.com Subject: RE:RE: [Asterisk-Users] RTP routing.. <http://antispam.uol.com.br> <http://mail.i.uol.com.br/tirateima_txt.gif>

Hi Eli, > That said, clang really should be turning int x2() { return x(0); } > into "define i32 @x2()" rather than "define i32 @x2(...)"; the > function isn't varargs, and marking it as such could lead to wrong > code for exotic calling conventions. I always understood that this is correct per C language specification. For functions that are internal (static),

I hate to post HTML to the list, but I refuse to respond to this, and I would like to say that whomever is using this service is kinda stupid for subscribing an email address to the list using this service. I hope they learn a lesson by us, the list users, NOT responding to this, and eventually, after not receiving any list mail, they?ll wonder ?hmm why is this list so dead?? Just my .02.

Thanks, annoying but only course of action I guess ... (c; > -----Original Message----- > From: WipeOut [mailto:wipe_out@lycos.co.uk] > Sent: 29 September 2003 10:36 > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] RE: Asterisk list a SPAMer > (uol.com.br), I think not ... > > > Just add a filter to your mail client to delete all mail from >

Do you compile this as C? In C, unlike in C++, empty parenthesis do not mean "no arguments", they mean "no prototype", which is typically treated the same way as varargs in calling conventions. To declare function with no arguments do typedef void (*FP)(void); Eugene On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Arushi Aggarwal <arushi987 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > >

configure.ac | 1 test/.gitignore | 19 -- test/Makefile.am | 40 ++++ test/compiler.c | 57 ++++++ test/swfdec_test.c | 156 +++++++++++++++++ test/swfdec_test_function.c | 67 +++++++ test/swfdec_test_function.h | 35 +++ test/swfdec_test_global.c | 40

Observa??o: mensagem anexa encaminhada. ______________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: 6MB, anti-spam e antiv?rus gratuito! Crie sua conta agora: http://mail.yahoo.com.br -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: motub@planet.nl Subject: Re: License question Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 18:03:52 +0100 Size: 2994 Url:

----- Mensagem encaminhada ---- De: Ricardo A. Reis <ricardo_bsd@yahoo.com.br> Para: security@freebsd.org Enviadas: Sexta-feira, 3 de Novembro de 2006 10:54:14 Assunto: FreeBSD and the new virtual machine-based rootkits Hi All, Recently i participated in Brazil on October 2006 The FIRST/TRANSITS and II Latin American Incident Response Conference (COLARIS). In the II COLARIS - Joanna

David/Johan, I would love to claim victory, but I don't think that D34901 catches this case. However, I got interested and threw this together quickly: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35140. This does catch the below case. If people are interested I can add test cases and submit for formal review. FWIW, it does hit about 1/3 of all of the SPEC benchmarks. I haven't done any performance

Hi all, I had the following function that used function pointers with void arguments, typedef void (*FP)(); void foo() { printf("hello world from foo\n"); } int main() { FP fp; fp = foo; (*fp)(); } The corresponding bitcode, with no optimizations is target datalayout =

I'm generating code for a target that only supports i32 natively. My front end is generating VAARG for accessing varargs parameters. The problem is that I get an assert when I compile this: #include <stdarg.h> int main(va_list ap) { typedef double type; type tmp; tmp = va_arg(ap, type); } Bitcode: ; ModuleID = 't0056.bc' target datalayout =

Hi Hal, Thanks for your hint! $ /opt/llvm-svn/bin/opt -S -internalize -internalize-public-api-list=main -globaldce hello3.ll -o hello3.dce.ll    it works :) But I argue that `main` Function should be inserted into ExternalNames by default: Index: lib/Transforms/IPO/Internalize.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Transforms/IPO/Internalize.cpp 

Hi, I've been thinking about a (potentially lazy) value tracking analysis that could be reused by several optimization passes. I don't know if it exists in llvm or not, but to my better knowledge it does not. ok there exists the ValueTracking class, but it does not provide a function like e.g. MayHaveTheValue(Value* v, APSInt x) to check if a given var v may ever have the value x My