search for: upcasting

...9;t really review anything stand-alone - adding very specific ops to the generic interface is rather awkward, eventually everyone wants that and we end up in a mess. I think the best solution here would be if we create a struct virtio_dma_buf which subclasses dma-buf, add a (hopefully safe) runtime upcasting functions, and then a virtio_dma_buf_get_uuid() function. Just storing the uuid should be doable (assuming this doesn't change during the lifetime of the buffer), so no need for a callback. - for the runtime upcasting the usual approach is to check the ->ops pointer. Which means that would n...

...9;t really review anything stand-alone - adding very specific ops to the generic interface is rather awkward, eventually everyone wants that and we end up in a mess. I think the best solution here would be if we create a struct virtio_dma_buf which subclasses dma-buf, add a (hopefully safe) runtime upcasting functions, and then a virtio_dma_buf_get_uuid() function. Just storing the uuid should be doable (assuming this doesn't change during the lifetime of the buffer), so no need for a callback. - for the runtime upcasting the usual approach is to check the ->ops pointer. Which means that would n...

I'm trying to track down the problem with the assertion failure in SelectionDAGBuilder.cpp. This is the code: *case* *Intrinsic*::gcroot: *if* (GFI) { *const* Value *Alloca = I.getArgOperand(0); *const* Constant *TypeMap = cast<Constant>(I.getArgOperand(1)); * FrameIndexSDNode *FI = cast<FrameIndexSDNode>(getValue(Alloca).getNode());*

In my language there are a lot of i16 definitions, but almost all of the time they are upgraded to i32 because my add operations only happen on i32. So to be representative to my language definition, I have a lots of Sext/Zext and Truncs pretty much every time I add or subtract. As soon as I pass through InstCombine things look much nicer, all the upcasts and downcasts go away, but my test cases

Upcasting using a container_of macro is more typesafe, faster and easier for the compiler to optimize. Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch&...

Upcasting using a container_of macro is more typesafe, faster and easier for the compiler to optimize. Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch&...

On Oct 4, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >> It won't cause a negative effect, go for it! Dynamic_cast is realllly slow compared to dyn_cast, it is worth the memory. > > Ok, here's the first batch. It converts the RecTy hierarchy over to > use LLVM-style RTTI. Along the way, I also wrote up a new doc "How to > set up LLVM-style

> It won't cause a negative effect, go for it! Dynamic_cast is realllly slow compared to dyn_cast, it is worth the memory. Ok, here's the first batch. It converts the RecTy hierarchy over to use LLVM-style RTTI. Along the way, I also wrote up a new doc "How to set up LLVM-style RTTI for your class hierarchy", which covers the previously undocumented (albeit not that

A question about the layout of structs: I decided to make my vtables out of structs rather than arrays. In other words, instead of being a table of opaque pointers, I decided to individually declare each entry with the correct type for that method. I figure that the various optimizers could do a better job if I preserve the type info. OK, so we come to the issue of inheritance: Suppose I have

>> Ok, here's the first batch. It converts the RecTy hierarchy over to >> use LLVM-style RTTI. Along the way, I also wrote up a new doc "How to >> set up LLVM-style RTTI for your class hierarchy", which covers the >> previously undocumented (albeit not that complicated) process for >> hooking into Support/Casting.h. > > Cool. Please pull this

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 06:41:21PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > This patch is an early RFC to judge the direction we are following in > our virtualization efforts in Chrome OS. The purpose is to start a > discussion on how to handle buffer sharing between multiple virtio > devices. > > On a side note, we are also working on a virtio video decoder interface > and

On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 02:41:54PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Daniel, Gerd, > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:23 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 06:41:21PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > This patch is an early RFC to judge the direction we are following in > > > our virtualization efforts in Chrome OS. The

On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 07:49:39PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 7:03 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 02:41:54PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > Hi Daniel, Gerd, > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:23 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > >

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:19:02PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:04 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 07:49:39PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 7:03 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 02:41:54PM

Hi Thomas, On Tuesday, 25 February 2020, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de> wrote: > Non-KMS drivers store state in struct drm_driver. This bloats the > structure for KMS drivers and prevents it from being declared with > 'static const' qualifiers. Moving the non-KMS state into a separate > data structure resolves this. > > Have you considered subclassing

Upcasting using a container_of macro is more typesafe, faster and easier for the compiler to optimize. Acked-by: Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam at ravnborg.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com...

...gt; > - adding very specific ops to the generic interface is rather awkward, > > eventually everyone wants that and we end up in a mess. I think the > > best solution here would be if we create a struct virtio_dma_buf which > > subclasses dma-buf, add a (hopefully safe) runtime upcasting > > functions, and then a virtio_dma_buf_get_uuid() function. Just storing > > the uuid should be doable (assuming this doesn't change during the > > lifetime of the buffer), so no need for a callback. > > So you would prefer a solution similar to the original version o...

Hi, > - for the runtime upcasting the usual approach is to check the ->ops > pointer. Which means that would need to be the same for all virtio > dma_bufs, which might get a bit awkward. But I'd really prefer we not > add allocator specific stuff like this to dma-buf. This is exactly the problem, it gets messy quic...

Hello, I hope you can help me! I`m trying to tune svm parameters: cost and gamma for a landsat image classification, but I get an error and I can't understand it. I write this: > tune(svm, Class~., data = mdt01bis, ranges = list(gamma = 2^(-15:3), cost > = 2^(-5:15))) and R gives: Error en predict.svm(model, if (!is.null(validation.x)) validation.x else if (useFormula)

Am 03.04.20 um 15:58 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > Upcasting using a container_of macro is more typesafe, faster and > easier for the compiler to optimize. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com> > Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied at redhat.com> > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> > Cc: Daniel Vetter...