search for: 133k

Yes, I had about 133K hits for INST_PHI with a negative value, out of 136K hits of any "INST_.*" with a negative valued operand. Overall there were 474K INST_PHI and 12 million "INST_.*" in my tests. - Jan On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> w...

On 10 October 2012 15:15, Jan Voung <jvoung at chromium.org> wrote: > Yes, I had about 133K hits for INST_PHI with a negative value, out of 136K > hits of any "INST_.*" with a negative valued operand. > > Overall there were 474K INST_PHI and 12 million "INST_.*" in my tests. Cool! Thanks again for working on this! > - Jan Cheers, Rafael

...code, and changed the thread model to parallel: read: IOPS=112k, BW=437MiB/s (458MB/s)(51.2GiB/120001msec) write: IOPS=112k, BW=437MiB/s (458MB/s)(51.2GiB/120001msec) (3) I reimplemented the memory plugin using a simple malloc, which is how it used to be in nbdkit <= 1.5.8: read: IOPS=133k, BW=518MiB/s (544MB/s)(60.7GiB/120002msec) write: IOPS=133k, BW=518MiB/s (543MB/s)(60.7GiB/120002msec) (4) I ran fio directly against /dev/shm to get some idea of how much performance we are losing by using NBD at all: read: IOPS=1018k, BW=3978MiB/s (4171MB/s)(466GiB/120001msec) write: IOP...

Hi to all, My first post... I just installed the drafting package CadStd under Wine 1.0.1. It loads all right, but any movement of the mouse in the drawing window portion generates an error pop-up "Access violation at address 0000000B". The mouse works all right in the control sections. I assume some utility file is restricting access to raise the error, but that's a guess. Any

On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com > wrote: > > +static void EmitSignedInt64(SmallVectorImpl<uint64_t> &Vals, uint64_t V) { > > Please start function names with a lower case letter. > > Done -- changed this function and most of the "pushValue" functions. I left PushValueAndType alone since that is an

This looks good to me. Just one question, you found that forward references are only common with phi operands, so it is not profitable to use a signed representation for other operands, right? Cheers, Rafael

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 05:26:07PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 1/4/19 4:08 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > First thing to say is that I need to do a *lot* more testing on this, > > so this is just an early peek. In particular, although it passed > > ‘make check && make check-valgrind’ I have *not* tested it against a > > multi-conn-aware client such as the

...s for the review Rafael! Chris, did you want to take a look at the patch too? Thanks, - Jan On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 October 2012 15:15, Jan Voung <jvoung at chromium.org> wrote: > > Yes, I had about 133K hits for INST_PHI with a negative value, out of > 136K > > hits of any "INST_.*" with a negative valued operand. > > > > Overall there were 474K INST_PHI and 12 million "INST_.*" in my tests. > > Cool! > > Thanks again for working on this! > &...

...08528890000042B490FB124d0 - - 1 1 131K 2.33K c3t6002219000854867000004C54CB7A199d0 - - 1 1 132K 2.33K c3t6002219000854867000004C74CB7A1D5d0 - - 1 1 130K 2.33K c3t6002219000852889000005594CB79B64d0 - - 1 1 133K 2.33K c3t6002219000852889000005624CB79C86d0 - - 1 1 132K 2.34K c3t6002219000852889000005654CB79CCCd0 - - 1 1 131K 2.34K c3t6002219000852889000005684CB79D1Ed0 - - 1 1 132K 2.33K c3t6B8AC6F0000F8376000005864DC9E9F1d0 0...

i got this problem, i want to shape my clients internet bw, but i don''t want to shape my local network traffic. For information, my clients using wireless to connect to my router[192.168.1.254]. when the clients request data from internet, example download from www.download.com, i want to shape his bandwidth, but when the clients [192.168.1.1] want to download from my file server example

...38K 3 272K 1400K 2070M 45K 45K 4 366K 1647K 4195M 119K 35K 4 280K 1261K 16G 251K 65K 4 525K 2365K 66G 509K 133K 5 1198K 4795K 261G 1022K 262K 5 2358K 9434K 1033G 2047K 516K 5 4650K 18M 2092G 2047K 1046K 6 10M 36M 4239G 4095K 1060K...

For existing commits, this is almost identical to v1, except that I updated some commit messages and reordered the commits in a somewhat more logical sequence. The main changes are the extra commits: [06/11] plugins: Return NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN from some readonly plugins. - Readonly plugins that can set the flag unconditionally. [09/11] partitioning: Return NBD_FLAG_CAN_MULTI_CONN. [10/11]

We finally flipped the switch on one of our ZFS-based servers, with approximately 1TB of 2.8TB (3 stripes of 950MB or so, each of which is a RAID5 volume on the adaptec card). We have snapshots every 4 hours for the first few days. If you add up the snapshot references it appears somewhat high versus daily use (mostly mail boxes, spam, etc changing), but say an aggregate of no more than 400+MB a

Hi everybody I have a Problem with Masquerading from my local net (loc) to my VPN (loc2). I can reach every Service from loc2 in loc, but I can''t get reach any service from loc in loc2. Has somebody an Idea where my mistake is ? Without shorewall, it was working. Thanks for helping Lars Technical Information : Shorewall 2.0.13 Suse 9.0 *177.177.77.X The first 3 Counts are changed

...all -- * lo 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 DROP !icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state INVALID 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * ppp0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpts:67:68 533 51169 fw2net all -- * ppp0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 1354 133K fw2loc all -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 Reject all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `Shorewall:OUTPUT:REJECT:'' 0 0 reject all -- *...

Joseph Little wrote: > I''d love to "vote" to have this addressed, but apparently votes for > bugs are no available to outsiders. > > What''s limiting Stanford EE''s move to using ZFS entirely for our > snapshoting filesystems and multi-tier storage is the inability to > access .zfs directories and snapshots in particular on NFSv3 clients.