search for: 2ee

Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "2ee".

Did you mean: 2e
2013 Sep 10
0
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
...which allows the bounds to be explicitly loaded and stored to bounds registers. Contrast with BNDLDX / BNDSTX, where the location is implicit. The BNDMOV instruction is also used for stack spills of the bounds registers. This allows MPX to be used for range checking in a similar way to the Thumb-2EE extensions. >> The pointer and metadata exist in separate registers, but single instructions (loads and stores) operate on the pointer + metadata. > Which MPX instructions do you mean here? Ah, sorry, I was confusing MPX with one of the other HardBound-like schemes here. In MPX, you...
2009 Jun 18
1
Inverting a square... (PR#13762)
Refiling this. The actual fix was slightly more complicated. Will soon be committed to R-Patched (aka 2.9.1 beta). -p rvaradhan at jhmi.edu wrote: > Full_Name: Ravi Varadhan > Version: 2.8.1 > OS: Windows > Submission from: (NULL) (162.129.251.19) >=20 >=20 > Inverting a matrix with solve(), but using LAPACK=3DTRUE, gives erroneo= us > results: Thanks, but there seems
2013 Sep 10
2
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:19 PM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk > wrote: > On 10 Sep 2013, at 10:13, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > > How did you come with 320 bits? > > 320=64*4+64, which is the size of the metadata table entry plus pointer > size, > > > Sorry, that should have been 192. The specification allows the
2013 Sep 10
3
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
...nds to be explicitly > loaded and stored to bounds registers. Contrast with BNDLDX / BNDSTX, > where the location is implicit. The BNDMOV instruction is also used for > stack spills of the bounds registers. This allows MPX to be used for range > checking in a similar way to the Thumb-2EE extensions. > Well, ok, you can treat this as a 192-bit fat pointer, but AFAICT this is not the real intention of the MPX developers since a fat pointer will break all ABIs, and MPX tries to preserve them. I don't think we need fat pointers to support MPX in LLVM -- it will complicate the i...
2005 Jun 09
1
krig.image help
> -----Original Message----- > From: r-help-bounces at stat.math.ethz.ch > [mailto:r-help-bounces at stat.math.ethz.ch]On Behalf Of Mike J Smith > Sent: 09 June 2005 09:58 > To: r-help at stat.math.ethz.ch > Subject: [R] krig.image help > > > Hi > > I have recently been experimenting with the use of kriging, primarily > through Goldensoftware's Surfer.
2003 Jul 03
1
ipv6 dialup: "nd6_lookup: failed to lookup" problem (4.8-REL)
...bytes (4) Prefix length: 64 Flags: 0xc0 1... .... = Onlink .1.. .... = Auto ..0. .... = Not router address ...0 .... = Not site prefix Valid lifetime: 0x00278d00 Preferred lifetime: 0x00093a80 Prefix: 3ffe:80ee:2ee:1300:: axxem.hide:~# ifconfig tun0 tun0: flags=8051<UP,POINTOPOINT,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 inet6 fe80::290:27ff:fe78:9275%tun0 --> fe80::2d0:baff:fef4:e80%tun0 prefixlen 128 scopeid 0x6 inet 1.2.3.4 --> 5.6.7.8 netmask 0xffffffff Opened by PID 42838 I ca...
2013 Sep 10
0
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
On 10 Sep 2013, at 12:13, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > Well, ok, you can treat this as a 192-bit fat pointer, but AFAICT this is not the real intention of the MPX developers > since a fat pointer will break all ABIs, and MPX tries to preserve them. MPX is an implementation of the HardBound concept from UPenn, where this was a design goal (see also their 'low-fat
2010 Jul 06
6
Xen 3.2.1-2 on Debian Lenny 2.6.26 2.6.26-24
Hi, Recently I have installed Debian Lenny on two different machines (different ram size, disks, Xeon dual and quad core, filesystems both xfs and ext3, etc). Packages versions: Dom0: ii libc6-xen 2.7-18lenny4 GNU C Library: Shared libraries [Xen version] ii libxenstore3.0 3.2.1-2 Xenstore communications