search for: ssume

> On May 9, 2020, at 5:12 PM, Andrea Di Biagio via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The llvm scheduling model is quite simple and doesn't allow mca to accurately simulate the execution of individual uOPs. That limitation is sort-of acceptable if you consider how the scheduling model framework was originally designed with a different goal in mind (i.e. machine

...alhost:3000. I am pretty sure this is nothing to with the testApp itself as if I create a clean rails application and try and start the web server the same thing happens. Has anyone experienced a problem similar to this or have any advice? Thanks in advance for any replies. Matt. P.S You can ssume my technical skill is low, not only am I new to ruby and rails, I?m pretty new to programming in general. I am quite capable of following instructions however! -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Environment: Solaris 2.5.1 Samba 1.9.18p3 We run samba from inetd (no special reason - just how its been done in the past). Then on one server we got masses of Samba daemons running (up to 40 as a time trying to run - load average 40+!), giving following complaints: Sep 28 14:39:06 zeus.brunel.ac.uk smbd[10728]: standard input is not a socket, a ssuming -D option Sep 28 14:39:06

Hi Alex, On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 4:00 PM Alex Renda <renda at csail.mit.edu> wrote: > Thanks, that’s very helpful! > > > > Also, sorry for the miscue on that bug with the 2/4 cycles — I realize now > that that’s an artifact of a change that I made to not crash when resource > groups overlap without all atomic subunits being specified: > > `echo 'fxrstor

Hi, I’m trying to work out the behavior of llvm-mca on instructions with ProcResGroups. My current understanding is: When an instruction requests a port group (e.g., HWPort015) and all of its atomic sub-resources (e.g., HWPort0,HWPort1,HWPort5), HWPort015 is marked as “reserved” and is issued in parallel with HWPort0, HWPort1, and HWPort5, blocking future instructions from reserving HWPort015