similar to: fdsync takes looong

I'm running Samba 3.0.14a-2 on FC4 as a print server. The system is joined to the domain and I'm using the domain security model. Pretty much, it's configured like my old Samba 2.2.7 server (which this new box is replacing). On the PC side, printers are assigned to a user via a VBScript running under a group policy. The first time that script runs and tries to add the printer

Is there somewhere I can specify a maximum execution time for a given request. (Eg, someone does something in my application that brings about and infinite loop). The idea of potentially huge queries or even a programmer mistake is not impossible, and I have a hard time accepting that I will release an application that has no way of handling that.

I've got two WinXP SP2 users. Roaming profiles. One of them takes about 25 seconds to log out unless she has made pretty drastic changes to her profile (My Documents, etc). My second user takes upwards of 3 minutes to log out, even if he has just logged in, not opened a thing or made changes, and then logged back out. Below is part of a strace as I don't know what I'm looking

So essentially I'm adding a path inside of the loop. Is there a way to have llvm automatically create new IR and update the PHIs simply by adding a block like this and changing the DomTree? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> Date: Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 12:08 PM Subject: Updating PHI for Instruction Domination? To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu So

Not that I'm aware of. -eric On Feb 2, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Ryan Taylor wrote: > So essentially I'm adding a path inside of the loop. Is there a way to have llvm automatically create new IR and update the PHIs simply by adding a block like this and changing the DomTree? > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> > Date:

So I have a loop with two blocks, a header (which points to return and latch) and a latch (which points to return and header). I have inserted a few new blocks, called H and F. Header now points to H and latch. Latch now points to F. H points to F. F points to Header and return. The PHI Nodes have been updated in Header accordingly, now coming from the preheader and F (instead of latch). My

Dear guys, I am having problems to obtain good information from the LoopInfo. I am always getting a trip count of 0, even though I am clearly passing a loop with a constant bound. I am using this pass below: void testLoopInfo(const Function& F) const { const LoopInfo *LI = &getAnalysis<LoopInfo>(); Function::const_iterator BB = F.begin(), E = F.end(); for (; BB !=

The Problem? Nowaday, SCEV called "Scalar Evolution" does only evolate instructions that has predictable operand, Constant-Based operand. such as that can evolute as a constant. otherwise we couldn't evolate it as SCEV node, evolated as SCEVUnknown. important thing that we remember is, we do not use SCEV only for Loop Deletion, which that doesn't really needed on nature loops

Hello, everyone, I created a dense map like this: DenseMap<Loop *, int> ls; And I have a module which contains 3 functions: function F and it has a loop which is " Loop at depth 1 containing: %1<header><exiting>,%3,%5<latch> " function G and it has two loops which are " Loop at depth 1 containing: %8<header><exiting>,%10,%14<latch>

James R Grinter wrote:- > >On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 09:39:37AM +0100, Mac wrote: >> On one previous occasion, the whole thing seemed to grind to a virtual >> halt, and we suspected (but couldn't prove) that a locking battle over >> (something like) secrets.tdb was to blame. > >(I recognise that symptom, see below) > >> Something that stands out is a huge

Hi all I want to move mails from folder test-ein to another folder test-aus with the new "doveadm move" command in dovecot 2.0.12. When I try the following I get a "Segmentation Fault" after the mail was copied to the new folder: # doveadm -v -f flow search -u g033 mailbox test-ein all 56779e33a911b84db22900005451a966 1 # doveadm -v -f flow search -u g033 mailbox

An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200320/34cdec77/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- Hi all, I have encountered some issues with the preservation of the location of llvm.loop metadata (containing optimisation hints), and would appreciate some feedback on the issue. The IR language description states that

Dear John, First thing, the 3 loops in Densemap are all " Loop at depth 1 containing: %1<header><exiting>,%3,%5<latch> " in the 3 functions. The dense map is in a ImmutablePass. I got it in FunctionPass and tried insert the information in this FunctionPass. So to turn the FunctionPass to ModulePass may be a better idea? Another interesting thing: if just before

On 2/25/2013 7:41 PM, Redmond, Paul wrote: > > I'm suggesting this as a possible alternative to the loop latch approach. > Please re-read my original email. Your reply seemed like you're quoting code that is currently generated, not your proposal. I'm not sure why you would want the loop metadata to be attached to some other branch. Loop latch will always exist, while, at

On 2/25/2013 2:08 PM, Redmond, Paul wrote: > > I've been looking through past threads looking for an answer to why the loop metadata is attached to the loop latch branch. What is the reason for putting the metadata inside the loop rather than outside (for example on the branch into the loop header.) Latch is a branch to the header. What branch in particular do you have in mind? Loop

Hi, On 2013-02-25, at 5:11 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek wrote: > On 2/25/2013 2:08 PM, Redmond, Paul wrote: >> >> I've been looking through past threads looking for an answer to why the loop metadata is attached to the loop latch branch. What is the reason for putting the metadata inside the loop rather than outside (for example on the branch into the loop header.) > >

Since both UART driver codes on Allwinner A31, OMAP5 and x86 would use these definitions, we refactor the codes into a separated header to avoid unnecessary duplication. Signed-off-by: Chen Baozi <baozich@gmail.com> --- xen/drivers/char/ns16550.c | 71 +--------------------------- xen/include/xen/ns16550-uart.h | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 105

In https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38011 (see also https://reviews.llvm.org/D48721) a problem was revealed related to llvm.loop metadata. The fault was that clang added the !llvm.loop metadata to branches outside of the loop (not only the loop latch). That was not handled properly by some opt passes (simplifying cfg) since it ended up merging branch instructions with different !llvm.loop

So my best bet is to try and work in reg2mem mode and then go back to mem2reg? I'm curious, it seems though when you split a block that the phis get updated, right? On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com> wrote: > Not that I'm aware of. > > -eric > > On Feb 2, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Ryan Taylor wrote: > > So essentially I'm

On 01/07/2015 05:33 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Philip Reames > <listmail at philipreames.com <mailto:listmail at philipreames.com>> wrote: > > I've been playing with approaches to getting better optimization > of loops which contain infrequently executed slow paths. I've > gotten as far as throwing together