similar to: random interactions in lme

These seem to get called, but it doesn't look like we have to care too much at this point. Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> --- .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/gsp/r535.c index

On Tue, 2023-12-05 at 08:55 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > +static int > +r535_gsp_msg_ucode_libos_print(void *priv, u32 fn, void *repv, u32 repc) > +{ > +???????/* work out what we should do here. */ > +???????return 0; > +} This is part of my logrm debugfs patch. ?It contains the printf log from a PMU exception. Do you want me to research the other two RPCs and tell you exactly

Using the kernel global workqueue to signal fences can lead to unexpected deadlocks. Some other work (e.g. from a different driver) could directly or indirectly depend on this fence to be signaled. However, if the WQ_MAX_ACTIVE limit is reached by waiters, this can prevent the work signaling the fence from running. While this seems fairly unlikely, it's potentially exploitable. Fixes:

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:14:53AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 00:45, Danilo Krummrich <dakr at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Using the kernel global workqueue to signal fences can lead to > > unexpected deadlocks. Some other work (e.g. from a different driver) > > could directly or indirectly depend on this fence to be signaled. > >

From: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> fences are signalled on nvidia hw using non-stall interrupts. non-stall interrupts are not latched from my reading. When nouveau emits a fence, it requests a NON_STALL signalling, but it only calls the interface to allow the non-stall irq to happen after it has already emitted the fence. A recent change eacabb546271 ("nouveau: push event

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 05:25:38PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > From: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> > > fences are signalled on nvidia hw using non-stall interrupts. > > non-stall interrupts are not latched from my reading. > > When nouveau emits a fence, it requests a NON_STALL signalling, > but it only calls the interface to allow the non-stall irq to happen

I'm fairly new to R and am wondering if anybody knows of R code to calculate confidence intervals for parameters (fixed effects and variance components) from mixed effects models based on Sattherthwaite's method? I'm also interested in Satterthwaite-based confidence intervals for linear combinations (mostly sums) of various variance components. [[alternative HTML version

From: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> This should break the deadlock between the fctx lock and the irq lock. This offloads the processing off the work from the irq into a workqueue. Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 19

Dear R experts, I was wondering if there are any R functions that give the tail area of a sum of chisquare distributions of the type: a_1 X_1 + a_2 X_2 where a_1 and a_2 are constants and X_1 and X_2 are independent chi-square variables with different degrees of freedom. Thanks, Klaus -- "Feel free" - 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS/Monat ...

Dear All: Significance Analysis of Microarrays(SAM) As we know sam do multiple t.test as following ## Default S3 method: t.test(x, y = NULL, alternative = c("two.sided", "less", "greater"),mu = 0, paired = FALSE, var.equal = FALSE,conf.level = 0.95, ...) var.equal: a logical variable indicating whether to treat the two variances as being equal. If 'TRUE'

This is not a bug report but didn't see another way to ask a question. For the approximate t-test assuming unequal variances, the R docs cite Welch's method for the df of the approximating distribution. I have several methods books, and they all uses Satterthwaite's method. Why does R use Welch's method where can I learn about Welch's method? Sincerely, David Allen

Dear all, I'm performing a t-test on two normal distributions with identical mean & standard deviation, and repeating this tests a very large number of times to describe an representative p value distribution in a null case. As a part of this, the program bins these values in 10 evenly distributed bins between 0 and 1 and reports the number of observations in each bin. What I have noticed

On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 at 09:07, Timur Tabi <ttabi at nvidia.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-12-05 at 08:55 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > > +static int > > +r535_gsp_msg_ucode_libos_print(void *priv, u32 fn, void *repv, u32 repc) > > +{ > > + /* work out what we should do here. */ > > + return 0; > > +} > > This is part of my logrm debugfs

Mike Hommey <mh at glandium.org> writes: > Hi, > > When running `notmuch compact` today, it stopped with the following > output: > > Compacting database... > compacting table postlist > Reduced by 25% 648656K (2498904K -> 1850248K) > compacting table docdata > Reduced by 15% 24K (152K -> 128K) > compacting table termlist > Reduced by

>>>>> "TL" == Thomas Lumley <tlumley@u.washington.edu> >>>>> on Sun, 6 Oct 2002 09:19:27 -0700 (PDT) writes: TL> On Sat, 5 Oct 2002 roxburg@kih.net wrote: >> This is not a bug report but didn't see another way to >> ask a question. TL> Well, you could try the r-help or r-devel mailing lists >> For

"Andrew C. Ward" <acward at uqconnect.net.au> : >With respect to 'tone' and 'friendliness', perhaps all that >is meant or needed is that people be polite and respectful. >I shake my head as often at rude answers Oh, by gosh, by golly. I don't think an occasional dose of 'real life', via a jab from the Professor, will cause any lasting harm

Dear R users: Suppose I have two different response variables y1, y2 that I regress separately on the different explanatory variables, x1 and x2 respectively. I need to compare points on two regression lines. These are the x and y values for each lines. x1<-c(0.5,1.0,2.5,5.0,10.0) y1<-c(204,407,1195,27404313) x2<-c(2.5,5.0,10.0,25.0) y2<-c(440,713,1520,2634) Suppose we need to

Dear list, I ran a mixed effect model using R 1.4.1 and SAS 8.0 on the SIMS data found in the SASmixed package and found that the degrees of freedoms for fixed effects are very different. From R, df = n - v -1 where n is total # of observations, v is the # of levels for the grouping factor. From SAS df = v -1. Am I wrong about this or can somebody explain which is correct and why? Thanks a

(This time with the r-help in the recipients...) Be careful when mixing lme4 and lmerTest together -- lmerTest extends and changes the behavior of various lme4 functions. >From the help page for lme4-anova (?lme4::anova.merMod) > ?anova?: returns the sequential decomposition of the contributions > of fixed-effects terms or, for multiple arguments, model >

Hi Ted, yes this was the problem. Thank you very much. best idaios On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Ted Harding <Ted.Harding@wlandres.net>wrote: > Ah! You have aqssigned a parameter "equal.var=TRUE", and "equal.var" > is not a listed paramater for t.test() -- see ?t.test : > > t.test(x, y = NULL, > alternative = c("two.sided",