Displaying 20 results from an estimated 870 matches for "suboptim".
Did you mean:
suboptima
2019 Apr 18
2
GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
Hi.
In the current state of gvt-g the user experience is suboptimal.
So my question is what are the ETAs for following features:
1. Accelerated virt-manager console using gvt-g device
2. Custom resolutions or dynamic resolution
3. UEFI VMs support (Windows guest)
Thanks.
2019 Apr 20
0
Re: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
...ws VM display on UEFI? Thanks.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: iGVT-g [mailto:igvt-g-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Alex Ivanov
> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 2:51 AM
> To: libvirt-users@redhat.com; igvt-g@lists.01.org; virt-tools-list@redhat.com
> Subject: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
>
> Hi.
> In the current state of gvt-g the user experience is suboptimal.
> So my question is what are the ETAs for following features:
> 1. Accelerated virt-manager console using gvt-g device 2. Custom resolutions
> or dynamic resolution 3. UEFI VMs support (W...
2011 Nov 20
6
A-law and mu-law
Hi Martijn,
thank you for your answer. So the problem would be suboptimal
compression due to suboptimal assumption about the input signal, right?
What I do not understand is how the format of a FLAC format would be
affected by supporting A-law and mu-law files as input (and thus
output). Despite of suboptimal performance, is it possible to treat 8bit
*-law samples as 8...
2019 May 09
0
Re: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
...> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:gerd@kraxel.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 3:28 PM
> To: Alex Ivanov <gnidorah@ya.ru>
> Cc: Yuan, Hang <hang.yuan@intel.com>; libvirt-users@redhat.com; igvt-
> g@lists.01.org; virt-tools-list@redhat.com
> Subject: Re: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
>
> Hi,
>
> > 1. Its about local display / dmabuf feature. Currently user needs to
> > use virt-viewer tool. But virt-manager already incorporates graphical
> > console. It would be nice if it could support accelerated gvt-g local
> > display....
2008 Oct 22
2
suboptimal lp solutions
Hi list,
I want to find the total maximum resources I can spend given a set
allocation proportion and some simple budget constraints.
However, I get suboptimal results via lp and friends (i.e. lpSolve and
simplex in the linprog and boot) .
For example:
library(lpSolve)
proportions = c( 0.46, 0.28, 0.26)
constraints = c( 352, 75, 171)
lp(objective.in = proportions,
const.mat = diag(c(1,1,1)),
const.rhs=constraints,
const.dir=rep('<=...
2019 May 08
3
Re: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
....
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: iGVT-g [mailto:igvt-g-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Alex Ivanov
>> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 2:51 AM
>> To: libvirt-users@redhat.com; igvt-g@lists.01.org; virt-tools-list@redhat.com
>> Subject: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
>>
>> Hi.
>> In the current state of gvt-g the user experience is suboptimal.
>> So my question is what are the ETAs for following features:
>> 1. Accelerated virt-manager console using gvt-g device 2. Custom resolutions
>> or dynamic resol...
2019 May 09
0
Re: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
Hi,
> 1. Its about local display / dmabuf feature. Currently user needs to
> use virt-viewer tool. But virt-manager already incorporates graphical
> console. It would be nice if it could support accelerated gvt-g local
> display.
virt-manager and virt-viewer essentially run the same code spice client
code: both are using the spice-gtk widget. So, if that isn't working
2019 May 19
1
Re: [iGVT-g] GVT-g - suboptimal user experience
So it looks like this solution is currently not very user friendly. Perhaps Intel could get Red Hat help to make first-class support of gvt feature in virt-manager?
09.05.2019, 10:28, "Gerd Hoffmann" <gerd@kraxel.org>:
> Hi,
>
>> 1. Its about local display / dmabuf feature. Currently user needs to
>> use virt-viewer tool. But virt-manager already incorporates
2019 Aug 08
2
Suboptimal code generated by clang+llc in quite a common scenario (?)
Hi Tim and Alex
Thanks for your replies.
So just to make it clear for me: does this imply that there’s indeed no way on the current version to tell the compiler or Clang to optimize this?
Thanks,
Joan
> On 8 Aug 2019, at 18:30, Tim Northover via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 17:08, Alex Brachet-Mialot via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at
2018 May 10
0
suboptimal type isomorphy handling involving opaque structs
In the following example, LLVM's logic for merging isomorphic types
causes two functions in different compilation units with identical
function signatures to have different signatures in the resulting
bitcode:
===========================
$ cat demo-struct1.c
struct foo { int x; };
struct bar { int x; };
struct foo *return_arg_1(struct foo *a, struct bar *b) { return a; }
$ cat demo-struct2.c
2006 May 23
4
[LLVMdev] Spilling register and frame indices
...sing frame index should be
done like this:
some_register = frame_pointer + offset
...... [some_register]
Since frame index eliminations happens after register allocation, I must
make sure 'some_register' does not participate in normal register
allocation.
That approach sounds suboptimal. By "reserving" one register we can already
cause some values to be spilled, that otherwise would be stored in
register.
The lifetimes of those 'some_register' is likely to be very small (1
instruction), so "reserving" it everywhere is not good.
Ideal approach would...
2014 Nov 28
2
[LLVMdev] ScalarEvolution: Suboptimal handling of globals
Hi,
For the program below, where "incr" and "Arr" are globals
=================================
int incr;
float Arr[1000];
int foo ()
{
float x = 0;
int newInc = incr+1;
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < 1000; j += incr) {
x += (Arr[i] + Arr[j]);
}
}
return x;
}
=================================
The SCEV expression computed
2012 Apr 05
0
[LLVMdev] Suboptimal code due to excessive spilling
...#39;t know much about this, but maybe -mllvm -unroll-count=1 can be used as a workaround?
/Patrik Hägglund
-----Original Message-----
From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Brent Walker
Sent: den 28 mars 2012 03:18
To: llvmdev
Subject: [LLVMdev] Suboptimal code due to excessive spilling
Hi,
I have run into the following strange behavior and wanted to ask for
some advice. For the C program below, function sum() gets inlined in
foo() but the code generated looks very suboptimal (the code is an
extract from a larger program).
Below I show the 32-b...
2019 Aug 08
3
Suboptimal code generated by clang+llc in quite a common scenario (?)
...; > retl
> > .cfi_endproc
> >
> > .comm _pp,3,0
> > .section __DATA,__data
> > .globl _scscx
> > .p2align 3
> > _scscx:
> > .long _pp
> >
> >
> > Again, the _scscx is loaded three times instead of reusing a register,
> which is suboptimal.
> >
> >
> > NOW, if I replace the original code by this:
> >
> > int pp[3];
> > int *scscx = pp;
> > int tst( int i, int j, int k )
> > {
> > scscx[0] = i;
> > scscx[1] = j;
> > scscx[2] = k;
> > return 0;
> >...
2006 May 23
2
[LLVMdev] Spilling register and frame indices
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 13:04 -0500, Chris Lattner wrote:
> > That approach sounds suboptimal. By "reserving" one register we can already
> > cause some values to be spilled, that otherwise would be stored in
> > register.
>
> Right.
>
> PowerPC has the same problem in certain cases. For example, vector loads
> only support reg+reg addressing, whic...
2016 May 10
14
[Bug 95334] New: GM107 with 2560x1440 display on HDMI selects suboptimal resolution 1920x1080
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95334
Bug ID: 95334
Summary: GM107 with 2560x1440 display on HDMI selects
suboptimal resolution 1920x1080
Product: xorg
Version: 7.7 (2012.06)
Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64)
OS: Linux (All)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: medium
Component: Driver/nouveau
Assignee: nouveau at lists....
2019 Aug 08
2
Suboptimal code generated by clang+llc in quite a common scenario (?)
...vl _scscx, %edx
movb %cl, 1(%edx)
movl _scscx, %ecx
movb %al, 2(%ecx)
xorl %eax, %eax
popl %esi
popl %ebp
retl
.cfi_endproc
.comm _pp,3,0
.section __DATA,__data
.globl _scscx
.p2align 3
_scscx:
.long _pp
Again, the _scscx is loaded three times instead of reusing a register, which is suboptimal.
NOW, if I replace the original code by this:
int pp[3];
int *scscx = pp;
int tst( int i, int j, int k )
{
scscx[0] = i;
scscx[1] = j;
scscx[2] = k;
return 0;
}
I get the following:
; Function Attrs: nofree norecurse nounwind optsize uwtable
define i32 @tst(i32 %i, i32 %j, i32 %k)...
2009 Jul 09
0
[LLVMdev] Wrong encoding of movd on x64
...ks for the testcase; fixed in r75142.
> Note that on x86-32 it produces correct code (though not optimal either; it
> doesn’t use movd). Also, notice that the last two instructions above should
> ideally just be a single movd to memory, instead of first writing to a GP
> register.
The suboptimal code on x86-32 is because there aren't patterns for i32
extract from <2 x i32> yet (so it gets expanded through memory). The
suboptimal code on x86-64 is due to a missing dagcombine; it doesn't
know that extracting an i64 and truncating it to an i32 is equivalent
to extracting an i...
2012 Sep 05
1
Starting service as non root user with puppet
...to run
these services as a non-root user.
I can control the services using upstart as a non root user and can
start and
stop the service using initctl without any problems. I''m trying to use
puppet to
start and stop these services; however, it''s not obvious if it is
possible.
A suboptimal approach appears to be one in which I create a
service.conf file
in /etc/init - this service.conf file can su to the user and run the
service. I think
this is suboptimal, as it''s not working with the user level control
mechanisms
that have already been designed into upstart.
So I'...
2006 May 23
0
[LLVMdev] Spilling register and frame indices
...gt;
> some_register = frame_pointer + offset
> ...... [some_register]
>
> Since frame index eliminations happens after register allocation, I must
> make sure 'some_register' does not participate in normal register
> allocation.
Right.
> That approach sounds suboptimal. By "reserving" one register we can already
> cause some values to be spilled, that otherwise would be stored in
> register.
Right.
PowerPC has the same problem in certain cases. For example, vector loads
only support reg+reg addressing, which means you have to load the offset...