search for: disproportionate

...iding memory costs for input files (esp. >>> minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of >>> implementing this just to do those measurements. >> >> If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library >> support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing >> with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done. > > This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it quite hard to see this as an acceptable position on llvm-dev. Why? What is wrong with setting priorities and...

...ales of a given species tend to co-occur in a given sampling unit more frequently than expected by chance. I'm thinking about using a binomial distribution with p as the sex ratio of the entire population. So, even though the population sex ratio is close to 50:50, each sampling unit would have disproportionately more males than females. Given that the test is not about p per se, how would you go about testing this hypothesis? (by the way, the total number of individuals in each sampling unit might not be the same). Thanks!Jonathan [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

...t strategies for avoiding memory costs for input files (esp. >> minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of >> implementing this just to do those measurements. > > If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library > support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing > with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done. This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it quite hard to see this as an acceptable position on llvm-dev. — Mehdio

...or input files (esp. >>>> minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of >>>> implementing this just to do those measurements. >>> >>> If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library >>> support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing >>> with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done. >> >> This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it quite hard to see this as an acceptable position on llvm-dev. > > Why? What is wrong with...

...ple project the executable is 2.6 MB. I realize LLVM is a complex and feature rich project but could anyone give me a rough idea of where most of the executable size is coming from, and maybe give some ideas on how to reduce it if possible? It's not like 2.6 MB is huge but it just seems disproportionate and I'd like to keep my project lightweight (it could be used for embedded systems one day). Note that I'm basically only using the IRBuilder, JIT, and a few common optimization passes. Removing the optimizations doesn't seem to affect the executable size at all, so I'm starting to...

...transformations you introduced? I'm tempted to ask a revert, but I'd > like to understand the motivations first. > Both r289813 and r289855 add a very small amount of matching (it seems?) compared to the rest of the size of instcombine. How is it that these checks are causing such a disproportionate slowdown compared to the rest of instcombine? (by "I can confirm for 1)" I assume you mean these two patches have a pretty significant impact on compile time; not "0.1%" each) -- Sean Silva > > -- > Davide > > "There are no solved problems; there are only...

...17:13, Warren Young wrote: > > Also, I???ll remind the list that one of the *prior* times the systemd > topic came up, I was the one reminding people that most of our jobs > summarize as ???Cope with change.??? > At some point 'coping with change' is discovered to consume a disproportionate amount of resources for the benefits obtained. In my sole opinion the Linux community appears to have a change-for-change-sake fetish. This is entirely appropriate for an experimental project. The mistake that I made many years ago was inferring that Linux was nonetheless suitable for business....

...do > w.r.t. different strategies for avoiding memory costs for input files (esp. > minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of > implementing this just to do those measurements. If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done. Cheers, Rafael

...gotten to the point > >>>>> of > >>>>> implementing this just to do those measurements. > >>>> > >>>> If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of > >>>> library > >>>> support is already disproportionately painful and prevents > >>>> easier sharing > >>>> with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is > >>>> done. > >>> > >>> This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it > >>> quite ha...

...t choice in this case, we need concrete reasons. We should discuss this in the context of the reasons you've provided (error handling, etc.). We are not in a position no judge and will not be until the linker is done. From what library support we have I think that was a horrible mistake with a disproportionate cost. *Once* the linker is done, if someone is able to first define what a modular linker means, write a patch for it and show that it doesn't degrade the linker performance or maintainability that is awesome. But we don't have a linker yet, so, *PLEASE* let us write a linker. I don't...

Am 16. Juni 2019 um 15:53 Uhr +0300 schrieb Aki Tuomi via dovecot: > You will save yourself from world of hurt if you use a dummy ca to sign > you smartcard cert. You can try without generating a CRL. I see. I've done that now, but the effort required seems to be disproportionate. I'm just a single person. Requiring a full-blown CA setup is like cracking breakfast eggs with a car. Now I not only have to take care about my smartcard, but also of an almighty CA private key that could be abused to impersonate me and that's not on my smartcard. Don't get me wrong....

...>>>>> minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of >>>>> implementing this just to do those measurements. >>>> >>>> If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library >>>> support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing >>>> with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done. >>> >>> This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it quite hard to see this as an acceptable position on llvm-dev. >> >> Why...

Hi, I received a small flurry of buildbot emails yesterday. Most of them seem to be repeats of previous failures and buildbot only mailed them to me because the previous build raised an exception instead of failing. However I noticed a couple configuration/system issues amongst them: * arxan_raphael is consistently hitting the 20 minute no-output timeout when running the link command

Ok I know this is off topic, but since you guys are usualy so helpful, I thought I''d try here first. Building a Rails App and one of the things we''ve done is put a CSS class of; * { font-family:"Lucida Grande",verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif; margin:0pt; padding:0pt; } Now the problem is that the padding setting, for one reason or another is killing my select

...; Is there a Config-Option to send error when ssl-connect ist not established to in cert accredited Hostname/Servername ? Did not found something like this or did not really understand function of the options. I do not know backgrounds to this issue. Cant decide if it would be a security risk or disproportionated wishes of securityexperts but i want to satisfy this costumer. How to handle thos? Thank you Andre

...elieve that in CodeGen/X86/lsr-i386.ll we are hoisting into the wrong loop now, but I'm not sure. The other failure is in CodeGen/Thumb2/v8_IT_5.ll is different block placement. Which is a bit odd. The frequencies given by my changes are certainly different, but the body of the loop is given a disproportionately larger frequency than the others (much like in the original case). Though, I think what's going on here is that my changes are causing the smaller frequencies to be saturated down to 1: Original: float-to-int: min = 0.0000004768367035, max = 2047.994141, factor = 16777232.0 Printing analys...

...'m tempted to ask a revert, but I'd > > > like to understand the motivations first. > > > > Both r289813 and r289855 add a very small amount of matching (it seems?) > compared to the rest of the size of instcombine. How is it that these > checks are causing such a disproportionate slowdown compared to the rest of > instcombine? (by "I can confirm for 1)" I assume you mean these two patches > have a pretty significant impact on compile time; not "0.1%" each) > > -- Sean Silva > > > > > > -- > > > Davide > > >...

...at line 16 of the example isn''t returning the right thing; it should be an AssociationCollection of OrderAddress. That''s where I''m starting to wonder if I''m spending too much time on something that is probably simple enough that it''s already working but disproportionately hard to write an RSpec example for (because the existing create_order_from_post method has no tests or examples and thus isn''t easy to test -- witness the 32 lines, modulo blank lines, of stubbing just to get the example to run). Suggestions on how to write the example, or advice on whe...

...2.6 MB… > > I realize LLVM is a complex and feature rich project but could > anyone give me a rough idea of where most of the executable size is > coming from, and maybe give some ideas on how to reduce it if > possible? > > It’s not like 2.6 MB is huge but it just seems disproportionate and > I’d like to keep my project lightweight (it could be used for > embedded systems one day). Note that I’m basically only using the > IRBuilder, JIT, and a few common optimization passes. Removing the > optimizations doesn’t seem to affect the executable size at all, so &g...

...g memory costs for input files (esp. > >> minor faults and dTLB costs). I've almost gotten to the point of > >> implementing this just to do those measurements. > > > > If you do please keep it local. The bare minimum we have of library > > support is already disproportionately painful and prevents easier sharing > > with COFF. We should really not add more until the linker is done. > > This is so much in contrast with the LLVM development, I find it quite hard to see this as an acceptable position on llvm-dev. > > LLD is a subproject of the LLVM pro...