search for: reentrance

I am beginning a much-delayed update of odesolve to include several ordinary differential equation solvers from the Livermore package ODEPACK. These are much-used and reliable Fortran codes, and I plan (as I did for lsoda in the current odesolve package) to make as few changes as possible to the Fortran 77 code. However, recently someone wanted to make nested calls to lsoda, which will not work,

...ization to tell the host we don't need callbacks now. As it is not reliable, the debug check is overzealous: it can happen on two CPUs at the same time. Document this. Even if it were reliable, the virtio_net driver doesn't disable callbacks on transmit so the START_USE/END_USE debugging reentrance protection can be easily tripped even on UP. Thanks to Balaji Rao for the bug report and testing. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> CC: Balaji Rao <balajirrao at gmail.com> diff -r 0b3e64be7696 drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c Mon...

...ization to tell the host we don't need callbacks now. As it is not reliable, the debug check is overzealous: it can happen on two CPUs at the same time. Document this. Even if it were reliable, the virtio_net driver doesn't disable callbacks on transmit so the START_USE/END_USE debugging reentrance protection can be easily tripped even on UP. Thanks to Balaji Rao for the bug report and testing. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> CC: Balaji Rao <balajirrao at gmail.com> diff -r 0b3e64be7696 drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c Mon...

.... Are there any performance concerns from changing to a recursive lock? As for spinlocks themselves, as far as I can reason, recursive locks are safe to use, as are per-cpu spinlocks which are used exclusivly in the NMI handler or MCE handler (but not both), given the proviso that we have C level reentrance protection for do_{nmi,mce}(). For the {rd,wr}msr()s, we can assume that the Xen code is good and is not going to fault on access to the MSR, but we certainly cant guarantee this. As a result, I do not think it is practical or indeed sensible to remove all possibility of faults from the NMI path...

Thanks for the tip, Brian. I did have a version that does everything in memory, but only had enough memory to get six threads going. (Although my system has 16GB, I have not taken the time to create 64-bit libraries for wxWidgets, TagLib, libFLAC, etc.) Based on the direction you are pointing me in, I assume that encoding from within the decoder is not permitted. I really like your idea of the

> How each target handles the code generation > differences will be the interesting part. Why not use a target specific calling convention? An interrupt is like a normal function call, it only has a different calling convention.

On May 24, 2011, at 12:11, David Troendle wrote: > Thanks for the tip, Brian. I did have a version that does > everything in > memory, but only had enough memory to get six threads going. > (Although my > system has 16GB, I have not taken the time to create 64-bit > libraries for > wxWidgets, TagLib, libFLAC, etc.) What's wrong with only 6 threads? Is that just 3

I'm trying to use a Tk widget to show some progress & intermediate results in a long-running R calculation. Does anybody know how (or whether) I can force a window redraw without waiting for the idle loop? Currently, refreshes only seem to happen when we return to the R toplevel read-eval-print loop. Thanks, Mark <><

There is a rather serious race with copyout() and process termination in -stable. sysctl_kern_proc() loops through the allproc list writing the results to user memory. If it stalls during the copyout (e.g. the user memory has to take a vm_fault) and the process is ripped out from under it it will go looping into never never land. The solution is very simple, simply

I've got a song that causes the vorbis plugin for xmms to crash while reading the vorbis equivilent of id3 tags. What is the proceedure for reporting bugs like this. Do I mail the bug into this mailing list and then serve the song off of a FTP server? -ben --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this

doc/swfdec-sections.txt | 1 libswfdec/swfdec_as_interpret.c | 14 ++++- libswfdec/swfdec_as_object.c | 6 +- libswfdec/swfdec_as_object.h | 3 - libswfdec/swfdec_loader.c | 18 +++--- libswfdec/swfdec_movie.c | 11 +++- libswfdec/swfdec_movie.h | 1

Hi I am trying to use nlm with an additional call to nlm within the function but after the first pass, the parameters to the outer call are being passed to the inner call. The inner call is a very trivial problem. ie: test.outer<-function(param.outer){ slope<-nlm(test.inner,param.inner) ... loglikelihood<-sum(...) return(-loglikelihood) } and nlm(test.outer,param.outer) on the

Hy you all, Short version: I think I have some code that could be interesting to make the R architecture evolve towards better thread support, easier memory management, better user interface programming (progress bar, logs), powerful debugging without recompiling (hach!) some years ago I start learning C with an ambitious project: write a C library for multivariate data analysis. On the route I

Hi all, As promised, here is the rough design of the upcoming MC-JIT*. Feedback appreciated! (*) To be clear, we are only calling it the MC-JIT until we have finished killing the old one. When I say JIT below, I mean the MC-JIT. I basically am ignoring completely the existing JIT. I will keep things API compatible whenever possible, of course. I see two main design directions for the JIT: --

I have spent quite some hours in the archives of this mailinglist and read a few threads mainly by Jeff Squyres and Monty about making oggenc multithreaded. Those threads all are dated around January 2001, quite a time ago. For my work experience period I have to implement a parallel (threaded) ogg encoder (If this is possible, of course.) If it can be done, the code will be given back to the

Quick follow up here: I talked to Eric for a bit about this proposal, and he convinced me that we should take a slightly different tack. I'll write a bit more about it later. The idea Eric convinced me was better is to not invent a FOO format, but just use the native platform object format and focus on writing essentially a runtime linker for that platforms object files. This has various

Hi, I've been watching the MC-JIT progress for some time, and #2 certainly looks like the best idea to me. I think however you've missed an important selling point of the "FOOJIT" architecture: * The use of a custom object file format directly enables the use of ahead-of-time compilation (using the JIT to recompile dynamically). Not only this but it allows the resaving of any

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 11:34:22 -0800 Daniel Dunbar <daniel at zuster.org> wrote: > Quick follow up here: > > I talked to Eric for a bit about this proposal, and he convinced me > that we should take a slightly different tack. I'll write a bit more > about it later. > > The idea Eric convinced me was better is to not invent a FOO format, > but just use the native

What kind of restrictions will the existing object file formats impose on the JIT? I don't know enough about the JIT and object file format interaction to know if this will be an issue. It seems clear that it would be worse to try to encode "extra things" in some obscure way than to create the FOO format initially. If FOO is truly a superset of everything this could even be the

Bringing it up again. - Sanjiv Sanjiv Gupta wrote: > Chris Lattner wrote: > >> We should discuss this on llvmdev, I think it came up before but there >> was no conclusive plan that was proposed. >> > The approach that we thought for PIC16 can be described in a > single line as below. > > "Keep the functions called from ISR and main separate by