similar to: [LLVMdev] Compile C files to one .bc file

Hi, I'm a student who is going to make a countermeasure for dangling pointers in c for his thesis. I need to make my source transformation using llvm. Nobody in my university already used LLVM. I already read a some documentation about llvm but i'm still lost. Do there exist some " examples/Tutorials" for making small source transformations. Or is there somebody who can help

Hi, Thanks for the help. I tried this out, but on x86_64 and with llvm 2.6 and llvm-gcc 4.2.1, I dont seem to get an aligned variable. This is the function definition that I have define internal fastcc void @walksub(%struct.hgstruct* noalias nocapture sret %agg.result, %struct.node* %p, double %dsq, %struct.hgstruct* byval align 64 %hg, i32 %level) nounwind { And these are the call sites,

Hi Arushi, > If I want a particular alignment on a ByVal argument, should I specify > it as a function attribute, or should I also add the attribute to > every callsite that calls that function. in theory you should do both. For example, if the call is an indirect call (i.e. to a function pointer where the function is not known) then it should be clear that you need to put the

Hi, If I want a particular alignment on a ByVal argument, should I specify it as a function attribute, or should I also add the attribute to every callsite that calls that function. Thanks, Arushi

On Thu, Jan 13, 2000 at 17:34:10, Andre Lucas wrote: > Subject: /dev/urandom > On Thu, Jan 13, 2000 at 09:24:01AM -0700, SysProg - Nathan Paul Simons wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Ben Taylor wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Max Shaposhnikov wrote: > > > > why ssh1.27 doesn't requre /dev/urandom on solaris? > > > > i think the

It's both in 2.6 and recent 2.6 (for RH ASS2.1 you'll probably need to copy the latest 2.4 defintion, but I don't care for obsolete junk). Index: src/super.c =================================================================== --- src/super.c (revision 1014) +++ src/super.c (working copy) @@ -799,7 +799,7 @@ /* get first two blocks */ for (i=0; i<2; i++) { - bhs[i] = getblk

Hi, here is the second version of OCFS2 quota fixes with Joel's comments fixed. Also I've added a patch defining counts of credits for quota operations as Joel asked. Honza

checks IO error in ocfs2_get_sector(). this patch is based on 1.4 git. Signed-off-by: Wengang wang <wen.gang.wang at oracle.com> -- Index: fs/ocfs2/super.c =================================================================== --- fs/ocfs2/super.c (revision 128) +++ fs/ocfs2/super.c (working copy) @@ -1203,6 +1203,12 @@ static int ocfs2_get_sector(struct super unlock_buffer(*bh);

The following series of patches attempts to detach metadata I/O from struct inode. They are currently tied together pretty tightly. Metadata reads happen via the ocfs2_read_blocks() functions, writes via both jbd2 and ocfs2_write_blocks(). - Each inode has a cache of associated metadata blocks stored on its ip_metadata_cache member. The ocfs2_read/write_blocks() functions take a struct

Dear all, I'm working on a project that links to the BH package (http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/BH/index.html). My packages doesn't call entry points which might terminate R nor write to stdout/stderr instead of to the console. However, it seems some of the codes in the BH package might. At any rate, when I include some boost headers such as boost/math/distributions/ through BH,

Hi, I did some more in-depth testing of OCFS2 quota code, especially with ECC feature enabled and spotted some problems. First four patches fix them. I need the fifth patch to be able to mount OCFS2 filesystem with 2.6.31-rc3. The sixth patch fixes a potential problem when quota syncing interval is updated while the cluster is running (which is not possible currently). Joel, could you please

always use the 2.6 variants and fix up for 2.4 under the hood Index: src/journal.c =================================================================== --- src/journal.c (revision 1156) +++ src/journal.c (working copy) @@ -105,9 +105,17 @@ return status; } -#else -#define ocfs_journal_start journal_start -#define ocfs_journal_stop journal_stop + +#define journal_start(journal, nblocks) \ +

Hello R experts, I am trying to analyze this dataset and am stuck on this problem for quite some time now. I am using mt.rawp2adjp. the output that came out was a matrix with two colums since I had asked it to calculate the adjusted p values using one method. so it has the two columns as: rawp BH I combined these using cbind with my actual dataframe. checked using head all was fine. thereafter I

The following 6 patches cleanup the jbd code and kill about 200 lines. First of 4 patches can apply to 2.6.13-git8 and 2.6.13-mm2. The rest of them can apply to 2.6.13-mm2. fs/jbd/checkpoint.c | 179 +++++++++++-------------------------------- fs/jbd/commit.c | 101 ++++++++++-------------- fs/jbd/journal.c | 11 +- fs/jbd/revoke.c | 158

Folks, The projection pursuit regression function in the base R seems to crash when the optimization level is set to zero, i.e. the initial ridge terms are accepted without refitting. I encountered this problem in an out-of-sample prediction exercise using predict. But further investigation suggests the issue is with the ppr fit and predict just sppeds up the crash. The other optlevels seem to be

The old extent merging code down underneath "ocfs2_mark_extent_written()" can't merge extents between leaf blocks. This patch resolve this. So that a large unwritten extent which has been split up with a bunch of writes can be merged together once all unwritten regions have been written to. Modification from V1 to V2: 1. Add more comments for some functions which is more complicated

Dear List, I have been trying to use p.adjust() to do BH multiple test correction and have gotten some unexpected results. I thought that the equation for this was: pBH = p*n/i where p is the original p value, n is the number of tests and i is the rank of the p value. However when I try and recreate the corrected p from my most significant value it does not match up to the one computed by the

I have two questions about the CRAN machines that build binary packages for Mac. When a new version of a package is released, (A) Do the downstream dependencies get re-checked? (B) Do the downstream dependencies get re-built? I have heard (but do not know for sure) that the answer to (A) is no, the downstream dependencies do not get rechecked. >From publicly available information on the

Hi. I got following BUG trace. This is violation of BUG_ON(!buffer_locked(bh)) check on submit_bh() function. In write_dev_supers(), if wait parameter is set and buffer_uptodate() check is negative, submit_bh() is executed and hit above BUG_ON. So I fixed this issue. Thanks. Jun 9 00:41:32 dl580 kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------ Jun 9 00:41:32 dl580 kernel: kernel BUG at

I think I have this one solved, I hope. I think what Andreas and I are running into are a few different assertions. One being the LVM lvm_do_pv_flush caused assertion which is related directly to invalidate_buffers() being called which then triggers refile_buffer() on a journaled buffer, which appears clean in all other ways according to the checks in refile_buffer(). The following is what