search for: lumped

...ometry *geo) > > static const struct block_device_operations virtblk_fops = { > .ioctl = virtblk_ioctl, > +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > + .compat_ioctl = blkdev_compat_ptr_ioctl, > +#endif > .owner = THIS_MODULE, > .getgeo = virtblk_getgeo, > }; Hmm - is virtio blk lumped in with scsi things intentionally? -- MST

...ometry *geo) > > static const struct block_device_operations virtblk_fops = { > .ioctl = virtblk_ioctl, > +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > + .compat_ioctl = blkdev_compat_ptr_ioctl, > +#endif > .owner = THIS_MODULE, > .getgeo = virtblk_getgeo, > }; Hmm - is virtio blk lumped in with scsi things intentionally? -- MST

...f the characteristics of each is the name of the branch. A colleague has generated some fairly interesting graphs from the data, but he's treating each unique branch as if it were a separate factor. Last I checked, I had 276 unique branches, but these could be aggregated, classified, or "lumped" into about 8 - 10 categories; I believe it would be useful and helpful for me to be able to do precisely that. A facility that could work for this purpose (that that we use in our "continuous build" driver) is the Bourne shell "case" statement. Such a construct might loo...

Hi all, I'm just getting started in R. My problem is the following: I have a data frame (v1) with lots of production data measurements. Each row contains a single measurement ('ARI_MIT') with a timestamp. I want to "lump" the data by months with their mean and standard deviation. I have already successfully managed to do the lumping by adding another column to my data

Hi Everyone, Working on a REST-based web application, and I need some ammo in dealing with my supervisors and contractors. Is it better to: Method 1: Take in one large XML-based POST request, which contains 1st, 2nd and 3rd level elements, and build the associated child and grandchild objects in the parent controller, Method 2: Instead use a number of smaller XML-based POST requests

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 7:39 AM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 04 Oct 2019, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote: > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig | 12 +- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.debug | 144 +++++++++++------------ > > Please split these out to a separate patch. Can't speak for others,

We need to look at how to support this on ia64, so how about making this an architecture dependent feature for now? Not sure what powerpc needs here, so I''m just lumping it into the old way bucket. Thanks, Alex Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@hp.com> --- diff -r 3ac19fda0bc2 tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py --- a/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py

Hello, Lutz Donnerhacke implemented DNS-Dampening. http://lutz.donnerhacke.de/eng/Blog/DNS-Dampening The implementation is available as patch for BIND9 only. He told me that there is an other method preferred by the nsd developer. It's called "Response Rate Limiting". May one describe the idea behind rate limiting and compare it with Lutz' solution? Thanks. -- Andreas

...ed things such as a carrier fault, bad network wiring (even more possible as we are using PoE), even badly configured QoS. However things being as they are my boss has taken it upon himself to absolve himself of any possible blame for any system that he manages (everything but the asterisk box) and lumped it all on me in such a way that its basically my job if i cannot get this working. With all of this, i need to do everything i can to rule out the Asterisk box, so i can go back to him with confidence and clear asterisk of any wrongdoing. Has anyone here ever heard of this sort of problem, and if...

...val analysis, coalescing, allocation, and spilling into a single register allocator pass. The register allocator pass is then responsible for controlling its own sub-passes (not just the order of passes, but also termination conditions). Similarly, branch folding and if-conversion should be lumped together into a cfg optimization pass. Devang, hint hint. :-) Evan On Sep 5, 2007, at 9:36 AM, Fernando Magno Quintao Pereira wrote: > > Hey all, > > is there a simple way to alternate between different register > allocators at run time? I would like to decide dynamically wh...

Another example would be .debug_pubnames and .debug_pubtypes sections. Currently these default to omitted for Darwin and PS4, but included everywhere else. My initial patch for "tuning" changes the PS4 platform criterion to the SCE debugger predicate; quite likely the "not Darwin" criterion ought to be "not LLDB" or in other words "on for GDB only."

Hi and thanks in advance, I am fairly new with R so I hope this problem isn't too amateur. I have a vector of count data which correspond to vectors of date (%m/%d/%Y) and time of day (%H:%M:%S). I am trying to compute various statistics (e.g. daily max) by lumping the data together by day. I have been able to utilize tapply() and group the counts together, but with the method I use I end

I have data in a format like this: name ssex sex view num rating rt ahl4 f m f 56 -108 2246 ahl4 f m f 74 85 1444 ahl4 f m f 52 151 1595 ahl4 f m f 85 1 1447 ahl4 f m f 53 46 1716 ahl4 f m f 37 145 1276 ahl4 f m f 50 98 1465 ahl4 f m f 51 -26 1322 ahl4 f m f 38 -97 1790 ahl4 f m f 14 -158 865 ... ahl4 f m p 43 -136 1669 ahl4 f m p 10 -59 808 ahl4 f m p 67 -111 1279 ahl4 f m p 85 -86 994 ahl4 f m

Hey all, is there a simple way to alternate between different register allocators at run time? I would like to decide dynamically which register allocator to use. The decision is based on information that is produced by a pass that executes before register allocation takes place. Is it possible to modify RegisterRegAlloc::Registry to take into consideration this information? Is there

Bill? Wendling wrote: >Also sprach Casey Carter: >} Issue: GraphWriter includes <ostream>, which my gcc2 apparently thinks >} is <ostream.h>. >} Fix: Make a new <Support/ostream> that handles this discrepancy, ala >} <Support/hash_set>. >} >Um...was it entirely necessary to issue *8* email messages to the group >with mostly single-line fixes

Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 02/27/2018 08:21 AM, hw wrote: >> Gordon Messmer wrote: >>> I've never seen anyone actually do this, but there's an article discussing it.? It is noteworthy that this requires enforcement in the client OS, as well as the switch. >> >> The article itself says that what it is describing only works within a >> Windoze world. >

everyone-- I notice that Llvm.llvm_handle_to_type is actually defined to create a type handle from a type, rather than vice versa as its name would imply. Should I send a patch to change the name of the function to reflect its type better, or should I just lump it? — j h woodyatt <jhw at conjury.org> http://jhw.vox.com/

On Feb 11, 2010, at 3:15 PM, David Greene wrote: > On Thursday 11 February 2010 14:44:23 Dan Gohman wrote: > >>> Then we can't use it to hold a non-temporal flag. The operand might be >>> non-temporal in one context but it may not be in another. >> >> Sharing only happens when two instructions have the "same" memory >> reference info. You

On Jul 6, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Tor Gunnar Houeland wrote: > On 07/06/2011 07:10 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Jul 6, 2011, at 1:55 AM, Tor Gunnar Houeland wrote: >> >>>> There is no need to include any notices in the binaries of an application built with clang, or some with some other application that links to the LLVM runtime libraries that are dual licensed.

In the implementation of the AliasSetTracker, I see LoadInst, StoreInst, and VAArgInst are treated specially. Why aren't AtomicCmpXchgInst and AtomicRMWInst treated with similar care? Lumping together with other unknown instructions seems unnecessarily expensive in compile time. Preston -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: