search for: nexting

Hi, I got a panic when running CentOS-6.5: crash> bt PID: 106074 TASK: ffff8839c1e32ae0 CPU: 4 COMMAND: "flushd4[cbd-sd-" #0 [ffff8839c2a91900] machine_kexec at ffffffff81038fa9 #1 [ffff8839c2a91960] crash_kexec at ffffffff810c5992 #2 [ffff8839c2a91a30] oops_end at ffffffff81515c90 #3 [ffff8839c2a91a60] no_context at ffffffff81049f1b #4 [ffff8839c2a91ab0]

Anywhere that we compute 'f = container_of(b)' then use 'f->backend.', we can instead just use 'b->'. Similarly, during registration, we can use the 'filename' input rather than our just-copied 'f->filename'. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> --- server/filters.c | 170 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file

This patch introduces an optimized assembler version of md5_process(), the inner loop of MD5 checksumming. It affects the performance of all MD5 operations in rsync - including block matching and whole-file checksums. Performance gain is 5-10% depending on the specific CPU. Originally created by Marc Bevand and placed in the public domain, later integrated into OpenSSL. This is the original

On error we will wait and free the tree log at unmount without a transaction. This means that the actual freeing of the blocks doesn''t happen which means we complain about space leaks on unmount. So to fix this just skip the transaction specific cleanup part of the tree log free''ing if we don''t have a transaction and that way we can free up our reserved space and our

In many places there is code that looks like: MBBI = next(MBBI); In C++0X there is a std::next that is likely to be in scope when these calls are made. And due to ADL the above call becomes ambiguous: llvm::next or std::next? I recommend: MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI); -Howard

This was previously used as ‘nxdata’ and stored a tuple of ’b->next’ and the real filter handle. However after recent changes we don't need it. We can use ‘b->next’ as nxdata, and the handle is passed to us by the calling functions. Inspired by Eric Blakes observations in this email: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-February/msg00092.html --- server/filters.c | 217

Future patches want to allow a filter to pass a single opaque parameter into another framework (such as ext2fs_open) or even spawn a helper thread, which requires that nxdata be stable for the entire life of the connection between .open and .close. Our current approach of creating a stack-allocated nxdata for every call does not play nicely with that scheme, so rework things into using a

Hi Stefano, [just casting the net a bit wider ...] On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini at eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next... > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Stephen, > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next: > > > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as

Hi Stefano, [just casting the net a bit wider ...] On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini at eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next... > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Stephen, > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next: > > > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as

Hi Stefano, [just casting the net a bit wider ...] On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:51:47 +0100 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini at eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > I forgot to CC the LKML and linux-next... > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Stephen, > > I have two patch series to merge in linux-next: > > > > PV on HVM: receive interrupts as

Hi all, While doing some static analysis I ran into the following piece of code at drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/mmu/vmm.c:957: 957#define node(root, dir) ((root)->head.dir == &vmm->list) ? NULL : \ 958 list_entry((root)->head.dir, struct nvkm_vma, head) 959 960void 961nvkm_vmm_unmap_region(struct nvkm_vmm *vmm, struct nvkm_vma *vma) 962{

I am tying myself in knots over subscripts when applied to lists I have a list along the lines of: lis<-list(c("a","b","next","want1","c"),c("d", "next", "want2", "a")) >From which I want to extract the values following "next" in each member of the list, i.e. something along the lines of

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:06 AM Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 09:07:44AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:46 AM syzbot > > <syzbot+d3a7951ed361037407db at syzkaller.appspotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > syzbot found the following crash on: > >

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:06 AM Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 06, 2020 at 09:07:44AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:46 AM syzbot > > <syzbot+d3a7951ed361037407db at syzkaller.appspotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > syzbot found the following crash on: > >

Hi, I am investigating a performance degradation between llvm-3.1 and llvm-3.2 (Note: current top-of-tree shows a similar degradation) One issue I see is the following: - 'loop invariant code motion' seems to be depending on the result of the 'reassociate expression' pass: In the samples below I observer the following behavior: Both start with the same expression: %add = add

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1289 Bug ID: 1289 Summary: iptables build fails with kernel 4.20-rc1 - gnu_inline attributes Product: iptables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: Ubuntu Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1060 Bug ID: 1060 Summary: Garbage output Product: libnetfilter_log Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: libnetfilter_log Assignee: netfilter-buglog at lists.netfilter.org

Hello R helpers, I have a quick question about loop and next In my loop, I have some random generation of data, but if the data doesn't meet some condition, then I want it to go next, and generate data again for next round. # just an example.. # i want to generate the data again, if the sum is smaller than 25 temp=rep(NA, 10) for(i in 1:10) { dt=sum(rbinom(10, 5, 0.5)) while (dt<25) next

On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Nov 14, 2009, at 3:16 PMPST, Howard Hinnant wrote: > >> In many places there is code that looks like: >> >> MBBI = next(MBBI); >> >> In C++0X there is a std::next that is likely to be in scope when these >> calls are made. And due to ADL the above call becomes ambiguous: >>

Hi, I want to use loop unrolling pass, however, I find that loop unrolling will introduces conditional branch at end of every "unrolled" part. For example, consider the following code *void foo( int n, int array_x[])* *{* * for (int i=0; i < n; i++)* * array_x[i] = i; * *}* Then I use this command "opt-3.5 try.bc -mem2reg -loops -loop-simplify -loop-rotate -lcssa