similar to: About detailed rule of fastcall

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> Nouveau has finally gotten CRC support, hooray! Well, it's under review at least: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/74804/ (it has a cover letter, but nouveau's mailing list configuration has blocked the email so I'm waiting for a moderator to fix that) So, this series adds the relevant tests for it since nvidia's CRC

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> --- tests/kms_pipe_crc_basic.c | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/kms_pipe_crc_basic.c b/tests/kms_pipe_crc_basic.c index d169b7bd..f121e27e 100644 --- a/tests/kms_pipe_crc_basic.c +++ b/tests/kms_pipe_crc_basic.c @@ -65,15 +65,14 @@ static void

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> We're finally getting CRC support in nouveau, so let's start testing this in igt as well! While the normal CRC capture tests are nice, there's a number of Nvidia-specific hardware characteristics that we need to test as well. The most important one is known as a "notifier context flip". Basically, Nvidia GPUs store generated CRCs

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> (Just forwarding this to nouveau's ml, since I completely forgot to before) Nouveau has finally gotten CRC support, hooray! Well, it's under review at least: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/74804/ (it has a cover letter, but nouveau's mailing list configuration has blocked the email so I'm waiting for a moderator to fix that)

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> Nouveau has finally gotten CRC support, and at this point that support has made its way upstream. Hooray! So, let's start adding some relevant tests for it since nvidia's CRC implementation has some rather interesting design choices that needed to be worked around. Lyude Paul (5): lib/igt_core: Fix igt_assert_fd() documentation

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> Nouveau has finally gotten CRC support, hooray! Well, it's under review at least: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/74804/ (it has a cover letter, but nouveau's mailing list configuration has blocked the email so I'm waiting for a moderator to fix that) So, this series adds the relevant tests for it since nvidia's CRC

On Mon, 2020-09-28 at 17:36 -0400, Jeremy Cline wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 05:00:51PM -0400, Lyude wrote: > > From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> > > > > We're finally getting CRC support in nouveau, so let's start testing > > this in igt as well! While the normal CRC capture tests are nice, > > there's a number of

I am trying to do a quasipoisson regression to know if the frequency of drinking of my subject is related to temperature. The problem is that I'm not sure how to interpret my result. 1) Since my result is signifiant, can I tell that the frequency of drinking of my subject increase linearly or exponentially? 2) When I want to quantify the increase, do I need to do an exponential

From: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> There's been a TODO sitting in the kms_plane test suite for a while now as a placeholder for actually generating a reference CRC for plane-position-hole tests. This means we have never actually been verifying whether or not partially covering our hole with a hardware plane works displays properly, and have just simply been checking that the frame

I am new to R and new to time series modeling. I have a set of variables (var1, var2, var3, var4, var5) for which I have historical yearly data. I am trying to use this data to produce a prediction of var1, 3 years into the future. I have a few basic questions: 1) I am able to read in my data, and convert it to a time series format using 'ts.' data_ts <- ts(data, start = 1988, end =

Hi, When compiling this function: __attribute__((fastcall)) int f(int x, int y) { return 0; } llvm 2.3 produces the following x86 assembler (with directives removed): f: xorl %eax, %eax ret $4 Where as GCC (version 4.2.3 (Ubuntu 4.2.3-2ubuntu7)) produces: f: xorl %eax, %eax ret Note the difference in ret. Functions calling a fastcall function in llvm adjust the stack by 4 to

Hi, I don't see this with llvm from svn, so it looks like it has been fixed. Ciao, Duncan. PS: Tested at -O1 and -O3, with and without a frame pointer.

I found this with LLVM 2.3 and reproduced with svn as of about thirty minutes ago and they both fail in the same way. If you run this code through opt -instcombine define fastcc i64 @fibo(i64) { switch i64 %0, label %2 [ i64 0, label %8 i64 1, label %8 ] ; <label>:2 ; preds = %1 %3 = sub i64 %0, 1 ; <i64> [#uses=1] %4 = call i64 @fibo(i64 %3) ; <i64> [#uses=1] %5 =

On Oct 5, 2008, at 10:55 PM, Arnaud Bergeron wrote: > I found this with LLVM 2.3 and reproduced with svn as of about thirty > minutes ago and they both fail in the same way. > > If you run this code through opt -instcombine Your input code has undefined behavior. You have to mark the callsite as fastcc also. -Chris

Hi Rafael, On 19/10/12 18:27, Rafael Espíndola wrote: >> Don't get me wrong, I don't have any good ideas about how to do this, I'm >> just hoping someone does. End result might allow something like: >> >> declare void @foo(double inreg <eax,edx> %x) > > Not sure I would go all the way to specifying registers in the IL > (although I liked it at

>>> Not sure I would go all the way to specifying registers in the IL >>> (although I liked it at some point). What I like most right now is >>> something along the lines of >>> http://llvm.org/pr12193. That makes it explicit if something is on the >>> stack or in registers and that information is correct for both the >>> caller and callee.

Hi Renato, > On 19 October 2012 16:40, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: >> Don't get me wrong, I don't have any good ideas about how to do this, I'm >> just hoping someone does. End result might allow something like: >> >> declare void @foo(double inreg <eax,edx> %x) > > Hi Chandler, > > We were discussing about this

Hi Good day. I am facing issue with creating a GlobalVariable. I already have an extern for that global in a header file to use it in the following way extern const void* DATA_TABLE[]; And with a LLVM PASS, I am trying to create this array with the same name and with initializer. So, I have following: GlobalVariable *gvar_data = new GlobalVariable( M, blockItems->getType(), true,

> Don't get me wrong, I don't have any good ideas about how to do this, I'm > just hoping someone does. End result might allow something like: > > declare void @foo(double inreg <eax,edx> %x) Not sure I would go all the way to specifying registers in the IL (although I liked it at some point). What I like most right now is something along the lines of

On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:58 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > On 19/10/12 18:27, Rafael Espíndola wrote: >>> Don't get me wrong, I don't have any good ideas about how to do this, I'm >>> just hoping someone does. End result might allow something like: >>> >>> declare void @foo(double inreg <eax,edx>