search for: ratify

.... I wonder if I should specify initial values for coxph? I got a dataset from a student who uses Stata and try to replicate in R. I will share data to you in case you want to see for yourself. Let me know if you want text or Stata data file. In R, I try this: > cox2 <- coxph(Surv(yrs2,ratify)~ accession+ haz.wst+ haz.in +haz.out+ wefgov+ rle+ rqe + pol.free +tai.2001 + ny.gdp.pcap.pp.cd + eio, data=dat3, control=coxph.control(iter.max=1000),singular.ok=T) Warning message: Ran out of iterations and did not converge in: fitter(X, Y, strats, offset, init, control, weights = weights, S...

# Overview and background RISC-V is a free and open instruction set architecture. It is a modular specification, with a range of standard extensions (e.g. floating point, atomics, etc). New standard extensions are developed through RISC-V Foundation working groups. The specifications for such extensions (e.g. vector and bit manipulation) are publicly available, but are still in flux and won't

On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 19:55, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Jan 21, 2020, at 5:00 AM, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > >> This all makes sense to me. > > > > That's correct, thanks for the feedback. > > > > I do like the idea from James of having the compiler always spit out a > > note

From: Aaron Conole <aconole at bytheb.org> The virtio committee recently ratified a change, VIRTIO-152, which defines the mtu field to be 'max' MTU, not simply desired MTU. This commit brings the virtio-net device in compliance with VIRTIO-152. Additionally, drop the max_mtu branch - it cannot be taken since the u16 returned by virtio_cread16 will never exceed the initial value of

From: Aaron Conole <aconole at bytheb.org> The virtio committee recently ratified a change, VIRTIO-152, which defines the mtu field to be 'max' MTU, not simply desired MTU. This commit brings the virtio-net device in compliance with VIRTIO-152. Additionally, drop the max_mtu branch - it cannot be taken since the u16 returned by virtio_cread16 will never exceed the initial value of

On Sep 6, 2012, at 4:33 PM, "Ouriel, Boaz" <boaz.ouriel at intel.com> wrote: > **** Introduction **** > Lately, Khronos has ratified a new provisional specification which is called SPIR. > This specification standardizes an intermediate representation for the OpenCL kernel language. > It is based on LLVM infrastructure and this is why I am sending this mail to the

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 01:14, Chris Lattner <clattner at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2020, at 10:01 AM, Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I believe code should be committed to LLVM when it is of sufficient > > quality, when it can be shown to benefit the LLVM user or developer > > communities, and when there is someone

Hello dear list members I am not an experienced user of Samba, so I can be committing some basic mistake, but it seems to me that there is something wrong with the way Samba propagates ACLs. I tried versions 3.0.32 and 3.2.4 and the result is the same. This happens with "map acl inherit = yes" on smb.conf. I have a directory (dir) with the following ACLs: # file: dir USER Admin

> -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf Of Vikram Adve > Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 3:52 PM > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] "SPIR" ? A Standard Portable IR for OpenCL > Kernel Language > > On Sep 6, 2012, at 4:33 PM, "Ouriel, Boaz"

The virtio committee recently ratified a change, VIRTIO-152, which defines the mtu field to be 'max' MTU, not simply desired MTU. This commit brings the virtio-net device in compliance with VIRTIO-152. Additionally, drop the max_mtu branch - it cannot be taken since the u16 returned by virtio_cread16 will never exceed the initial value of max_mtu. Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole

The virtio committee recently ratified a change, VIRTIO-152, which defines the mtu field to be 'max' MTU, not simply desired MTU. This commit brings the virtio-net device in compliance with VIRTIO-152. Additionally, drop the max_mtu branch - it cannot be taken since the u16 returned by virtio_cread16 will never exceed the initial value of max_mtu. Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole

Hello, will the next update of CentOS 6 (6.10) have TLSv1.3 support? Thanks, Walter

...and we propose that the community begin reviewing changes to implement the x32 ABI. It should also be noted that the x32 ABI is already supported by binutils, gcc, and glibc, and that the Native Client team hopes to host its changes there on top of x32 as well. Our proposal is that the community ratify the idea of supporting the x32 ABI and that the Native Client team start by defining the variables/flags/etc., to allow selecting the x32 ABI in LLVM. We are aware of the previous set of patches posted to this list for x32, and will be as consistent with that direction as possible. For background...

Following on from my previous missive - now apparently resolved :D I now have another problem. This time with Sage Line50 Ver11. It appears to have installed OK and seems to link to the network share drive (G:), however it will not allow me (or anyone else) to log in. If I use any good username, it comes back with "invalid password", even for users with no password. If I use any

...o verify the assumptions made here and on the host side). Could you please submit this proposal to the OASIS Virtio TC for inclusion into the next spec draft? Ideally as a patch against the tex source, but a prose description would do as well. The TC meets on a bi-weekly basis, we should be able to ratify this quickly. > --- > drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c > index 16bfd50..68d8d1b 100644 > --- a/drivers...

...o verify the assumptions made here and on the host side). Could you please submit this proposal to the OASIS Virtio TC for inclusion into the next spec draft? Ideally as a patch against the tex source, but a prose description would do as well. The TC meets on a bi-weekly basis, we should be able to ratify this quickly. > --- > drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c > index 16bfd50..68d8d1b 100644 > --- a/drivers...

Greetings All, I am sending this mail on behalf of the OpenCL Khronos members. **** Introduction **** Lately, Khronos has ratified a new provisional specification which is called SPIR. This specification standardizes an intermediate representation for the OpenCL kernel language. It is based on LLVM infrastructure and this is why I am sending this mail to the LLVM mailing list. Khronos members

...unity begin reviewing > changes to implement the x32 ABI. It should also be noted that the > x32 ABI is already supported by binutils, gcc, and glibc, and that > the Native Client team hopes to host its changes there on top of > x32 as well. > > Our proposal is that the community ratify the idea of supporting > the x32 ABI and that the Native Client team start by defining the > variables/flags/etc., to allow selecting the x32 ABI in LLVM. We > are aware of the previous set of patches posted to this list for x32, > and will be as consistent with that direction as possi...

...ally as a patch against the tex source, but a prose > > description would do as well. > > Most certainly. Please give me a bit to follow up on this, as the next > couple of days are going to be hellishly busy.. > > > The TC meets on a bi-weekly basis, we should be able to ratify > > this quickly. > > > > Aside from that, please consider ACK'ing the vhost specific changes so > these can make it into v3.15-rc1 code. > > --nab > Hmm but what if the TC wants to change the interface somewhat? I guess we'll still be able to fix it after...

...ally as a patch against the tex source, but a prose > > description would do as well. > > Most certainly. Please give me a bit to follow up on this, as the next > couple of days are going to be hellishly busy.. > > > The TC meets on a bi-weekly basis, we should be able to ratify > > this quickly. > > > > Aside from that, please consider ACK'ing the vhost specific changes so > these can make it into v3.15-rc1 code. > > --nab > Hmm but what if the TC wants to change the interface somewhat? I guess we'll still be able to fix it after...