similar to: [LLVMdev] Lower CFI IDs Using Target Intrinsic

Hi, So far I've gleaned heaps of useful info from the list and got mostly running with NUT. There was a thread by Paul Battaglia and Kjell Claesson about the R3000 which has helped me get so far, but now with the patched driver I still have this on startup: # /usr/local/ups/bin/upsdrvctl start Network UPS Tools - UPS driver controller 2.0.5 Network UPS Tools - BCMXCP UPS driver 0.11

Hi All, I'm trying to communication with the HP r3000 XR UP using the latest stable build and I'm getting the following errors. Can anyone enlighten me with the errors below and what other course of action I can take. Thanks in advance. Paul. [root@WRRFtpServer etc]# /usr/local/ups/bin/upsdrvctl start Network UPS Tools - UPS driver controller 2.0.5 Network UPS Tools - BCMXCP UPS

On Thu, 2015-05-14 at 13:51 -0700, John R Pierce wrote: > On 5/14/2015 1:39 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > Does this mean it may be possible to run basic version of C5, C6 and C7 > > on Arm64* CPU systems ? Presumably this will include the Raspberry Pi ? > is the rasberry pi ARMv8 (arm64) ? I thought it was v7 (32bit only) ~~~~~~~~~~ Raspberry Pi 2 Model B is the second

Hi, I think there are a set of typos in the ATOMIC_LOAD_UMIN_I* and ATOMIC_LOAD_UMAX_I* pseudo-instructions . Specifically, def ATOMIC_LOAD_MIN_I32 : PseudoInst< (outs GPR:$dst), (ins GPR:$ptr, GPR:$val), NoItinerary, [(set GPR:$dst, (atomic_load_min_32 GPR:$ptr, GPR:$val))]>; and def ATOMIC_LOAD_UMIN_I32 : PseudoInst< (outs

Thanks. Fixed with r147032. Evan On Dec 16, 2011, at 1:50 AM, George Russell wrote: > Hi, > > I think there are a set of typos in the ATOMIC_LOAD_UMIN_I* and > ATOMIC_LOAD_UMAX_I* > pseudo-instructions . > > Specifically, > > def ATOMIC_LOAD_MIN_I32 : PseudoInst< > (outs GPR:$dst), (ins GPR:$ptr, GPR:$val), NoItinerary, >

Hi Evan, The problem repeats with the i8 and i16 variants, as well. Cheers, George On 21/12/2011 04:07, Evan Cheng wrote: > Thanks. Fixed with r147032. > > Evan > > On Dec 16, 2011, at 1:50 AM, George Russell wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I think there are a set of typos in the ATOMIC_LOAD_UMIN_I* and >> ATOMIC_LOAD_UMAX_I* >> pseudo-instructions .

Hi Everyone, I am trying to decide on a MC'ized reorg of ARMAsmPrinter for MC/ELF, and had some questions. Currently, it defines quite a few methods like printAddrMode4Operand (linked to ARMInstrInfo.td) that currently assume raw text support in the OutStreamer. Are these methods still supposed to be invoked in the MC'ized path for assembly output? Is JimG's new MC/.s

On Sep 29, 2010, at 3:09 PM, Jason Kim wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I am trying to decide on a MC'ized reorg of ARMAsmPrinter for MC/ELF, > and had some questions. > > Currently, it defines quite a few methods like printAddrMode4Operand > (linked to ARMInstrInfo.td) that currently assume raw text support in > the OutStreamer. Are these methods still supposed to be

Hi Jim, > Since this is by definition only for .s file emission, why is this clearly wrong? Perhaps it is, but it's not obvious to me why. Attributes should be emitted into object file as well... -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

On Sep 29, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > Hi Jim, > >> Since this is by definition only for .s file emission, why is this clearly wrong? Perhaps it is, but it's not obvious to me why. > Attributes should be emitted into object file as well... Yes, but surely not by a function explicitly indicated to be for assembly files. I would expect there to be an

On Sep 29, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Jason Kim wrote: >> Yes, but surely not by a function explicitly indicated to be for assembly files. I would expect there to be an equivalent function to do what needs done for object files. Perhaps there isn't one (yet) and that's what's leading to the confusion? > > LOL :-) Yes, maybe that's it. Included is a patch w comments that >

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > > On Sep 29, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Anton Korobeynikov wrote: > >> Hi Jim, >> >>> Since this is by definition only for .s file emission, why is this clearly wrong? Perhaps it is, but it's not obvious to me why. >> Attributes should be emitted into object file as well... > >

Hi Mikaël, Thanks for the patch. Some comments: 1. Please don't use tabs. 2. Index: lib/Target/ARM/ARMInstrInfo.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/Target/ARM/ARMInstrInfo.cpp (revision 14) +++ lib/Target/ARM/ARMInstrInfo.cpp (working copy) @@ -904,7 +904,8 @@ return TAI->getInlineAsmLength(MI-

On Thu, 2015-05-14 at 14:25 -0500, Jim Perrin wrote: > We've produced a disk image intended to help hardware vendors and > enthusiasts who are interested in bringing CentOS to their AArch64 based > platform. This allows a vendor to bypass the installer or to edit the > disk image before booting in order to test kernel modules or options. It > is intended for development purposes

Hi all, I tried to do a variance components using nlme, but I got the following warning mesage ##################################################### not meaningful for factors in: Ops.factor(y[revOrder], Fitted) ###################################################### Can someone point out what is the meaning of this warning message? I tried to look at Ops.factor, but I don't

Hi Leslie, On 20 December 2017 at 10:51, Leslie Zhai via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Sorry, I am apprentice of lowRISC, and meet new bug when porting GlobalISel > to RISCV target > https://github.com/xiangzhai/llvm/commit/b3f91ea54d9fee0ef7e73a32c6b8456bbe252811 > > > In file included from >

Hi all, FlexyCore, the company I am working for, use LLVM to generate binary for ARM platform. We are very fulfilled with LLVM, and FlexyCore will be pleased to contribute on this software. We need debug support in ARM binary, but, in LLVM 2.4, this support is not activated for ARM backend. Consequently, I made small modifications in order to activate it (see the patch in attach file). My

Dear samba-Team, The bug reported in PR#12819 for AXI 4.1.5 persits also in samba 2.0.3. The Bug prevents the connecting of other users as root to any share. I have a workaround/fix tested on AIX 4.1.5 ,4.3.2 with gcc 2.8.1 here: Change samba-2.0.3/source/lib/util_sec.c funktion set_effective_uid like this: 155c155 < #elif defined(HAVE_SETREUID) --- > #elif defined(HAVE_SETREUID)

Am Montag, den 29.12.2014, 10:49 +0800 schrieb Vince Hsu: [...] > >> That's a read fence to assure the post of the previous writes through > >> Tegra interconnect. (copy-paster from > >> https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/tegra.git/+/28b107dcb3aa122de8e94e48af548140d519298f) > > I see what it does, the question is more about why this is needed. > >

Dear samba-Team, There is a bug in Samba 2.0.3 and 2.0.4b with IBM AXI 4.x. The Bug prevents connecting of other users than root to any share. I have a workaround/fix tested on AIX 4.1.5 ,4.3.2 with gcc 2.8.1 here: Change samba-2.0.4b/source/lib/util_sec.c funktion set_effective_uid like this: 155c155 < #elif defined(HAVE_SETREUID) --- > #elif defined(HAVE_SETREUID) &&