search for: sads

Hello, I have a data set which I am using to find a model with the most significant parameters included and most importantly, the p-values. The full model is of the form: sad[,1]~b_1 sad[,2]+b_2 sad[,3]+b_3 sad[,4]+b_4 sad[,5]+b_5 sad[,6]+b_6 sad[,7]+b_7 sad[,8]+b_8 sad[,9]+b_9 sad[,10], where the 9 variables on the right hand side are all indicator variables. The thing I don't understand

Dear all, Lets say I have the following data frame: > set.seed(1) > col1 <- c(rep('happy',9), rep('sad', 9)) > col2 <- rep(c(rep('alpha', 3), rep('beta', 3), rep('gamma', 3)),2) > dates <- as.Date(rep(c('2009-10-13', '2009-10-14', '2009-10-15'),6)) > score=rnorm(18, 10, 3) > df1<-data.frame(col1=col1,

Hello Rowland, Thank you very much for your support so far. Now I could join. But: Now I have a problem with the DNS. I use the samba internal DNS. When I try to reach mydom.local or SAD.mydom.local, I only get the error: ? nslookup SAD.mydom.local Server: 192.168.159.98 Address: 192.168.159.98 # 53 Non-authoritative answer: *** Can not find SAD.mydom.local: No answer

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > Hi Vijender, > > Thanks for posting this, there is wide support here for improving our support for reductions of various kinds, both in flavor and robustness. I've cc'd some others who have previously discussed this. > > James has advocated in the past for an intrinsic for horizontal reductions,

Hello everybody, ? I have a new AD which is installed on a Windows Server 2019. Now I want to add a Samba DC to this AD. The Samba DC is in the same subnet. Samba Server: Ubuntu 18.04 Samba 4.10.6 ? The Windows AD has the following settings: PS C: \ Users \ Administrator> Get-ADForest ApplicationPartitions: {DC = DomainDnsZones, DC = mydom, DC = local, DC = ForestDnsZones, DC = mydom,

Hi, I've been giving a look at the archives of the mailing list and I've seen that you have rewritten a lot of functions using mmx to make them faster. I'm currently trying to optimize some code, but I'm have some problems, because I work with 16 bit per component and not 8 like theora. I know that it is off topic, but I'm posting to ask you a little help. I've got

On Tue, 8 Sep 2020, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 08/09/2020 13:27, Harald Hannelius via samba wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I have users in Samba AD with uid- and gidnumbers. I also have group >> objects with gidNumbers. >> >> I have a Samba member server (all servers Samba 4.9.5-Debian) that have one >> share and a lot of directories.

We have a windows domain "AD" and a samba domain "SAD" running Samba 4.9 in AD-mode. We also have an old NT4 domain called "Samba" running Samba 3.6 + OpenLDAP. We have the same users and passwords in all three. The user objects in the "SAD"-domain have the same uidNumber as in the "Samba"-domain. Workstations and users log on to the windows

Hello, I was looking at the following test case which is very relevant in imaging applications. int sad(unsigned char *pix1, unsigned char *pix2) { int sum = 0; for( int x = 0; x < 16; x++ ) { sum += abs( pix1[x] - pix2[x] ); } return sum; } The llvm IR generated after all the IR

Nadav and other vectorizer folks- Is there any plan to support special idioms in the loop vectorizer like sum of absolute difference (SAD) ? We see some useful cases where llvm is losing performance at -O3 due to SADs not being vectorized (hence PSADBWs not being generated). Also, since the abs() call is already lowered to a sequence of 'icmp; neg; select' by simplifylibcalls (in -O3), we may then need to get hold of this pattern in the loop vectorizer (part of reduction analysis) and do the needful. T...

...> > On 4 November 2014 11:06, Das, Dibyendu <Dibyendu.Das at amd.com> wrote: > > Is there any plan to support special idioms in the loop vectorizer > > like sum of absolute difference (SAD) ? We see some useful cases > > where llvm is losing performance at -O3 due to SADs not being > > vectorized (hence PSADBWs not being generated). > > It's been a while, but this could either be that the legalisation > phase is not recognising the reduction or that the cost is not taking > into account the lowered abs(). > > What does -debug-only=loop-...

Hi Renato, Thanks for your response. My concern was actually this. For example, take vector type V8i16 on X86 target With llvm.sad() intrinsic: VC1 (Vector Cost) = Cost associated with "PSAD" instruction. W/ llvm.absd() and llvm.hadd() VC2 = Cost associated with "absolute diff" + "horizontal add" ( ??? ) As I will be querying with getIntrinsicCost(ID) for these

After some attempt to implement reduce-add in LLVM, I found out a easier way to detect reduce-add without introducing new IR operations. The basic idea is annotating phi node instead of add (so that it is easier to handle other reduction operations). In PHINode class, we can add a flag indicating if the phi node is a reduction one (the flag can be set in loop vectorizer for vectorized phi nodes).

Hi Asghar-Ahmed, I saw your last ping - sorry, I'm away on vacation and back on Wednesday. Generally, I'm not sure that having both absd/hadd and sad are compatible with the discussions going on in other threads, for example my thread about min and max. Given that those two intrinsics are fairly trivial to match , I don't see the need to have two different canonical forms. James On

...gt; > > wrote: > > > > Is there any plan to support special idioms in the loop > > > > vectorizer > > > > like sum of absolute difference (SAD) ? We see some useful > > > > cases > > > > where llvm is losing performance at -O3 due to SADs not being > > > > vectorized (hence PSADBWs not being generated). > > > > > > It's been a while, but this could either be that the legalisation > > > phase is not recognising the reduction or that the cost is not > > > taking > > > into...

On 4 May 2015 at 08:37, Shahid, Asghar-ahmad <Asghar-ahmad.Shahid at amd.com> wrote: > My worry is regarding the query for cost calculation for specific SAD > instructions such as ‘psad’ (X86) or ‘usad’ (ARM) in Loop Vectorizer. Hi Shahid, The vectorizer's cost model has the ability to return different costs for the same instruction based on the arguments (scalar/vector,

Hello list, I have tried rather much (forums, google) and trying this as the last option. The problem is that one is not able to access "group" samba shares from windows 7 machines, everything ok from win-ts-2003 & xp machines. Every user belongs to his primary group defined in samba+openldap pdc. If they want to access the share named according to their primary group (with

Hi, First of all, my apologies for the extension of this message, but it is needeed for you to undertand my problem. Straight to the point: i have this domain in my company running in Samba 3.0.2 My users are: hcoelho, jardim, gamito, yesenia, smatias, fqueiros, faugusto, vamaro, peixinho, aragao, dina, pinho. I have this shares with the users that can access them and the correponding Linux

...s, Dibyendu <Dibyendu.Das at amd.com> > > wrote: > > > Is there any plan to support special idioms in the loop > > > vectorizer > > > like sum of absolute difference (SAD) ? We see some useful cases > > > where llvm is losing performance at -O3 due to SADs not being > > > vectorized (hence PSADBWs not being generated). > > > > It's been a while, but this could either be that the legalisation > > phase is not recognising the reduction or that the cost is not > > taking > > into account the lowered abs(). &gt...

if ya' haven't seen it already, check out: http://www.canoe.ca/MoneyWSJ/wsj2-dow.html ad, sad, sad. on many fronts. I don't begin to understand how this might work; I suppose the MP3 degradation only applies to MS encoding software... *shrug* this may, however, provide a good leveraging point for Vorbis. have fun dongoodman