search for: owner

Hi there, i have a model house and a model owner A house can have many owners. Now i want to find all owners of a specific street and i want to list them So i do: houses = House.find(:all, :conditions => ''street LIKE "%foo%"'') So now i got an array of all houses in that street @owners = houses[0].owner i'...

...) > - return 0; > - return 1; > -} > - > void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) > { > unsigned int cpu = SPINLOCK_LOCKVAL; > @@ -62,7 +53,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) > continue; > } > /* First iteration: check if the lock owner is running. */ > - if (first_diag && cpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { > + if (first_diag && arch_vcpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { > smp_yield_cpu(~owner); > first_diag = 0; > continue; > @@ -81,7 +72,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) >...

...) > - return 0; > - return 1; > -} > - > void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) > { > unsigned int cpu = SPINLOCK_LOCKVAL; > @@ -62,7 +53,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) > continue; > } > /* First iteration: check if the lock owner is running. */ > - if (first_diag && cpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { > + if (first_diag && arch_vcpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { > smp_yield_cpu(~owner); > first_diag = 0; > continue; > @@ -81,7 +72,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) >...

...terRole > > > ForestDnsZonesMasterRole > > > Just what version of Samba are you using ? > > My Samba 4.5.2 domain also appears to be missing these roles. > > Can I simply seize these roles? > > [root at larkin27 ~]# samba-tool fsmo show > > SchemaMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS > > Settings,CN=TEMP2008R2DC,CN=Servers,.. > > InfrastructureMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27,... > > RidAllocationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27,... > > PdcEmulationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27,,... > > DomainNa...

...seem to be missing two FSMO roles: > DomainDnsZonesMasterRole > ForestDnsZonesMasterRole > Just what version of Samba are you using ? My Samba 4.5.2 domain also appears to be missing these roles. Can I simply seize these roles? [root at larkin27 ~]# samba-tool fsmo show SchemaMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=TEMP2008R2DC,CN=Servers,.. InfrastructureMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27,... RidAllocationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27,... PdcEmulationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27,,... DomainNamingMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=LARKIN27...

..._WAIT, cpu)) - return 0; - if (smp_vcpu_scheduled(cpu)) - return 0; - return 1; -} - void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) { unsigned int cpu = SPINLOCK_LOCKVAL; @@ -62,7 +53,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) continue; } /* First iteration: check if the lock owner is running. */ - if (first_diag && cpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { + if (first_diag && arch_vcpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { smp_yield_cpu(~owner); first_diag = 0; continue; @@ -81,7 +72,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) * yield the CPU unconditionally. Fo...

..._WAIT, cpu)) - return 0; - if (smp_vcpu_scheduled(cpu)) - return 0; - return 1; -} - void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) { unsigned int cpu = SPINLOCK_LOCKVAL; @@ -62,7 +53,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) continue; } /* First iteration: check if the lock owner is running. */ - if (first_diag && cpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { + if (first_diag && arch_vcpu_is_preempted(~owner)) { smp_yield_cpu(~owner); first_diag = 0; continue; @@ -81,7 +72,7 @@ void arch_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lp) * yield the CPU unconditionally. Fo...

Hi, I've been going through my queue of candidate patches for the 3.6 branch, and I think the process could be smoother if we had more code owners. So, I'd like to encourage people to nominate themselves or others as code owners for any part of LLVM that doesn't already have one. The responsibilities of a code owner include reviewing patches submitted to llvm-commits and approving merge requests to the stable branches. To get the b...

...scripting or any automated >> way of dealing with the build. > Will you please clarify how the automation / scripting helps with the > patch approval process? Generally release patch process works like this: - patch gets checked-in on the trunk - developer sends message to the code owner who approves the patch and sends the *APPROVED* to the release manager - somebody (not specified who in the current flow) merges the patch on to the release_branch - release manager creates rc1/rc2/and final branches from the release_branch verifying that each patch has been approved by the code...

...amba 4.7.0. Ultimately, both dcs agreed that the 4.7.0 dc (dc3) had all the roles and replication and the databases were in good shape. However, during the process, I got a lot of errors that seemed to magically disappear. Should I be worried? root at dc3:~# samba-tool fsmo show SchemaMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=DC0,CN=Servers,CN=Default-First-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=example,DC=com InfrastructureMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=DC0,CN=Servers,CN=Default-First-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=example,DC=com RidAllocationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=DC0...

One of these days I''ll figure this out, but in the meantime help me be a better programmer by eliminating some excess code: I''m trying to check to see if somebody trying to view/edit/update a product is the owner. In my scaffold I have this code that works: def edit @owner = Product.find(params[:id].to_i) if @owner.user_id == @user.id @product = Product.find(params[:id]) else flash[:notice] = ''Sorry, you''re not the owner.'' redirect_to :...

> More power to volunteers!  Hopefully if people talk >with each other, help each other out, and maintain a friendly and cooperative >atmosphere then all problems with code ownership will just come out in the wash. +1 I think this is where we want the community to be, and the role of the code owners should hopefully be minimal. >However another take on the whole code owner thing is that the code owner is >the person who has the final say on what goes in and what do...

...report back? Even better if you can fix up any breakage it might cause :) >From 60a288509baa34df6a0bf437c977925a0a617c72 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel at suse.de> Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:38:18 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] iommu/exynos: Get rid of 'struct exynos_iommu_owner' Remove 'struct exynos_iommu_owner' and replace it with a single-linked list of 'struct sysmmu_drvdata'. The first item in the list acts as a replacement for the previous exynos_iommu_owner structure. The iommu_device member of the first list item is reported to the IOMMU core...

Hi guys, I''m having a little trouble understanding the differences and knowing when to use "def foo" and "def self.foo" in my models. I don''t quite understand them and was hoping someone could explain or give me examples on how to use the "self." properly. For example, I had "def foo" in my model "Account" and in one of

...o far. But unfortunately I could not fix the problems. So I decided to start over again at a situation where all the fsmo roles resides on the old controller. Here is a transcript of what I did and the errors reported: The inititial position srv-kb-dc1:~ # samba-tool fsmo show SchemaMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=SRV-KB-PRIMDC,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fi... InfrastructureMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=SRV-KB-PRIMDC,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fi... RidAllocationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Settings,CN=SRV-KB-PRIMDC,CN=Servers,CN=Default-Fi... PdcEmulationMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS Setting...

...reed that the 4.7.0 dc (dc3) had all the roles > and replication and the databases were in good shape. However, during > the process, I got a lot of errors that seemed to magically > disappear. > > Should I be worried? > > root at dc3:~# samba-tool fsmo show SchemaMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS > Settings,CN=DC0,CN=Servers,CN=Default-First-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=example,DC=com > InfrastructureMasterRole owner: CN=NTDS > Settings,CN=DC0,CN=Servers,CN=Default-First-Site-Name,CN=Sites,CN=Configuration,DC=example,DC=com > RidAllocationMasterRole owner: CN=...

On 11/11/2012 11:58 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> Is there a particular sub-system size that makes sense to mark as owned? I have been >> reworking the library call simplification infrastructure recently and will be happy >> to sign up as an owner for that. > > I think that "directory level" is the right granularity. If you're interested in signing > up to maintain and review the whole instcombine library, that would be a great level. To > see what this entails, see: > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html...

...age ----- > From: "Joe Abbey" <joe.abbey at gmail.com> > To: "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 1:25:04 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] !!! 3.2 Release branch patching and the Code Owners > > > On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > > > I think that the code owner process is becoming complicated and I > > am not sure if it serves Chris's original intent. I don't think > > that we need to change every f...

...Meador Inge wrote: > On 11/11/2012 11:58 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > >>> Is there a particular sub-system size that makes sense to mark as owned? I have been >>> reworking the library call simplification infrastructure recently and will be happy >>> to sign up as an owner for that. >> >> I think that "directory level" is the right granularity. If you're interested in signing >> up to maintain and review the whole instcombine library, that would be a great level. To >> see what this entails, see: >> http://llvm.org/docs/D...

...rom: "Joe Abbey" <joe.abbey at gmail.com> >> To: "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> >> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 1:25:04 PM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] !!! 3.2 Release branch patching and the Code Owners >> >> >> On Nov 17, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: >> >>> I think that the code owner process is becoming complicated and I >>> am not sure if it serves Chris's original intent. I don't think >>> that we...