similar to: Allocating shadow tables at the bottom of memory on Linux.

Here's a basic patch which would solve it in sort of the same way as the other optimizations I was fixing (just special case the debug info & fix it up). I can work up a test case for this as well, or you can, if you like/this seems reasonable. On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:20:55PM -0700, David

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > Looks good, thanks! > > Can you write the test case, please? You probably have more experience > writing debug info tests than I do. > Sure - though how would I get the pre-dfsan .ll file to produce this behavior? I've tried compiling to a .ll file without dfsan, then feeling that .ll

Hi Fellows, Is there a way to allocate dynamic array within an LLVM IR file from my code generator? Say., how to create an array type with a size determined through a global variable. Symbolically, something like below: Value *sz = Mod->getOrInsertGlobal("SIZE", Int32Ty); Type *ArrayTy = ArrayType::get(FloatTy, sz)

We upgraded to 2.2.6rc2 yesterday to continue our resolving of the printer driver problems. (Thanks Jerry & Rohin) For unrelated reasons I wanted to log into the machine late last night and found Putty couldn't connect. When I get in this morning the server was completely hooped with Out of Memory errors on the screen with SMBD as the offending process. Trying to log into any console

> > It just occurred to me... in the case where it's failing, the > ExecutionEngine was trying to JIT a global, and it had never JITted > any functions!  I'll work up a small test case, but I think it's > relevant since the thing is trying to allocate the globals with the > functions. > That was it! The following small test program crashes in getPointerToGlobal:

Yesterday evening I upgraded my FreeBSD 5.5-RELEASE Server from Samba 3.0.22 to 3.0.23. This gave me a LOT of work today... :-( This is what I found so far: My Samba-Server is member of a large ADS-Domain. After the upgrade, file based Usermapping didn't work anymore... better: it worked TWICE. (I once opened a PR for that a few years ago :-). So, with LogLevel 3:

I'm an LLVM newbie, trying to write a pass that adds instrumentation to a program, and have a couple of questions. For purposes of this discussion, suppose I'm trying to add a per-function counter that is incremented each time a function is called. At the end of the target program's execution, I would like to output the value of each counter. My questions are as follows: 1.

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1128 Bug ID: 1128 Summary: ip6_tables connmark or connlabel never matches Product: netfilter/iptables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: SuSE Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: ip6_tables (kernel)

Hi Everyone, I'm quite new to LLVM and I want to update value of global variable in LLVM IR. I created new global variable in ModulePass: bool runOnModule(llvm::Module &M) { IRBuilder<> Builder(M.getContext()); Instruction *I = &*inst_begin(M.getFunction("main")); Builder.SetInsertPoint(I); M.getOrInsertGlobal("globalKey",

My wife and I each have our own workstation dual-booting WinXP and Gentoo Linux. We also have a third which runs Gentoo all the time. I wanted to set up samba on the third box and provide some extra storage space for both our Windows installs. It worked for a few days, then all of a sudden it stopped letting my account (michael) in while still letting my wife's account (amy) use the share.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Folks, I've uploaded the *final* 3.0.23c roll up patch to http://samba.org/~jerry/patches/patch-3.0.23b-3.0.23c-gwc-2.diffs.gz. I've already cut the 3.0.23c tarballs so unless there is a major problem, this will be the final change set. Please report *any* bugs that you find. I'd like to wrap this one up and do the public 3.0.23c

Thanks Hal. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Carter, > > In my opinion (and I was the one who committed the changes in question), > it depends on the hardware. The pipeline descriptions are for the PPC > 440, which is an embedded PPC chip use in a variety of places. As such, > it is a fairly specific target, and using

Hello, This is probably a bit of a beginner's question but I am new to LLVM I have been examining the possibility of constructing something similar to the JnJVM for a language which supports dynamic class loading. The problem I am having is determining how the JIT system allows for dynamic loading of functions into the JIT. The paper indicates the JnJVM use some sort of callback when the JIT

I apologize if this has been asked before but which classes utilize the information in these files? I am asking since I am trying to extend the MIPS backend to 64bit among other things. Thanks in advance, Carter.

I hope you don't mind if do have a follow up question- is code in place in the code generation supporting "proper" scheduling via the processor itineraries in LLVM? On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Carter Cheng <cartercheng at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Hal. > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:19 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > >> Carter,

Hello, I was looking over some of the Target commits. I did notice some detailed pipeline descriptions in the ppc backends. I havent noticed anything in the literature describing this technique. Is this a standard approach for mapping SSA to hardware? Thanks in advance, Carter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hello, I was looking over the documentation support for exceptions and it indicates that the invoke unwind support is incomplete. Is this still the case in 2.9? Regards, Carter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110814/400bcca0/attachment.html>

OK.. I'm up to my eyes in LD BS! I can't for the life of me understand how any carrier, either VoIP or traditional service provider can make heads or tails of how to hand off an * based call to an LD provider. Every provider I talk to, says I have to have a traditional T1 put in to their respective networks. I don't want to do this. I want a LD provider that can take a IP, SIP, IAX

Hi, Which of the various Wine downloads on the download page should I get for PCLinuxOS? Thanks. Stephen Carter

I've checked the samba code (sessetup) and found out that samba always send spnego packet when Extended Security capability is ON. (This can't be turned off/on ie. "use spnego = false") Does it mean I can "never" connect to smb server that doesn't support spnego if Extended Security is supported by server? Is my understanding correct?