Displaying 20 results from an estimated 289 matches for "morell".
Did you mean:
morel
2011 Mar 20
3
manova question
Dear friends,
Sorry for this somewhat generically titled posting but I had a question
with using contrasts in a manova context. So here is my question:
Suppose I am interested in doing inference on \beta in the case of the
model given by:
Y = X %*% \beta + e
where Y is a n x p matrix of observations, X is a n x m design matrix,
\beta is m x p matrix of parameters, and e is a
2020 Jul 02
2
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On 2020-06-29 18:05, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:57:14 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:43:57PM +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host
>>> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the
2020 Jul 02
2
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On 2020-06-29 18:05, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:57:14 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:43:57PM +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host
>>> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the
2020 Jun 10
5
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
protected access.
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>
---
drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
2020 Jun 10
5
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
protected access.
Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>
---
drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
2020 Jun 10
2
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020-06-10 15:24, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:11:51 +0200
> Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>
>> Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
>> protected access.
>>
>>
2020 Jun 10
2
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020-06-10 15:24, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:11:51 +0200
> Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>
>> Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
>> protected access.
>>
>>
2020 Jul 07
3
[PATCH v4 1/2] virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 10:44:36 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> An architecture may need to validate the VIRTIO devices features
> based on architecture specificities.
s/specifities/specifics/
>
> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>
2020 Jul 07
3
[PATCH v4 1/2] virtio: let arch validate VIRTIO features
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 10:44:36 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> An architecture may need to validate the VIRTIO devices features
> based on architecture specificities.
s/specifities/specifics/
>
> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>
2020 Jul 06
1
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 15:37:37 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 2020-07-02 15:03, Pierre Morel wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2020-06-29 18:05, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:57:14 -0400
> >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst at redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at
2020 Jun 12
2
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020-06-11 05:10, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2020/6/10 ??9:11, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>
>> Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
>> protected access.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at
2020 Jun 12
2
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020-06-11 05:10, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2020/6/10 ??9:11, Pierre Morel wrote:
>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>
>> Let's refuse a VIRTIO device which does not use IOMMU
>> protected access.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel at
2004 Jan 30
2
Permissions and authorities
Hello,
We've just migrated from Netware to Samba and have only 1 problem that's
affecting our users.
When a user creates a new document in a directory the owner and group or
both set to root. The directories are owned by a specific user and there is
also a group associated with the directory.
I was expecting that any new documents created would have the same user and
owner as the
2020 Jul 09
4
[PATCH v5 2/2] s390: virtio: PV needs VIRTIO I/O device protection
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 10:39:19 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> If protected virtualization is active on s390, the virtio queues are
> not accessible to the host, unless VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM has been
> negotiated. Use the new arch_validate_virtio_features() interface to
> fail probe if that's not the case, preventing a host error on access
> attempt
2020 Jul 09
4
[PATCH v5 2/2] s390: virtio: PV needs VIRTIO I/O device protection
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 10:39:19 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> If protected virtualization is active on s390, the virtio queues are
> not accessible to the host, unless VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM has been
> negotiated. Use the new arch_validate_virtio_features() interface to
> fail probe if that's not the case, preventing a host error on access
> attempt
2020 Jul 07
4
[PATCH v4 2/2] s390: virtio: PV needs VIRTIO I/O device protection
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 10:44:37 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> S390, protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host access
> needs to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the use of
> VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 and VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM.
Hm... what about:
"If protected virtualization is active on s390, the virtio queues are
not accessible to the
2020 Jun 15
3
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020/6/12 ??7:38, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-06-12 11:21, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2020-06-11 05:10, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2020/6/10 ??9:11, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>>>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>>>
2020 Jul 07
4
[PATCH v4 2/2] s390: virtio: PV needs VIRTIO I/O device protection
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 10:44:37 +0200
Pierre Morel <pmorel at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> S390, protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host access
> needs to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the use of
> VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 and VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM.
Hm... what about:
"If protected virtualization is active on s390, the virtio queues are
not accessible to the
2020 Jun 15
3
[PATCH] s390: protvirt: virtio: Refuse device without IOMMU
On 2020/6/12 ??7:38, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-06-12 11:21, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2020-06-11 05:10, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2020/6/10 ??9:11, Pierre Morel wrote:
>>>> Protected Virtualisation protects the memory of the guest and
>>>> do not allow a the host to access all of its memory.
>>>>
2020 Jun 29
3
[PATCH v3 1/1] s390: virtio: let arch accept devices without IOMMU feature
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 12:43:57PM +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
> An architecture protecting the guest memory against unauthorized host
> access may want to enforce VIRTIO I/O device protection through the
> use of VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM.
>
> Let's give a chance to the architecture to accept or not devices
> without VIRTIO_F_IOMMU_PLATFORM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pierre