search for: wptr

...dimif, double *Lsum) { ...} //* the interface part *// #define getDim(A) INTEGER(coerceVector(getAttrib(A,R_DimSymbol), INTSXP)) SEXP Projector5(SEXP L, SEXP G, SEXP W, SEXP xymod, SEXP modif) { //* digest SEXPs from R *// int *dimL, *dimG, *dimW, *dimxy, *dimif; double *lptr, *gptr, *wptr, *ifptr; int *xyptr; dimL=getDim(L); PROTECT(L=coerceVector(L, REALSXP)); lptr=REAL(L); dimG=getDim(G); PROTECT(G=coerceVector(G, REALSXP)); gptr=REAL(G); dimW=getDim(W); PROTECT(W=coerceVector(W, REALSXP)); wptr=REAL(W); dimxy=getDim(xymod); PROTECT(...

...W, SEXP xymod, SEXP modif){ int nprot=0; PROTECT(L=AS_NUMERIC(L));nprot++; PROTECT(G=AS_NUMERIC(G));nprot++; PROTECT(W=AS_NUMERIC(W));nprot++; PROTECT(xymod=AS_INTEGER(xymod));nprot++; PROTECT(modif=AS_NUMERIC(modif));nprot++; double *lptr; lptr=REAL(L); double *gptr; gptr=REAL(G); double *wptr; wptr=REAL(W); int *xyptr; xyptr=INTEGER(xymod); double *ifptr; ifptr=REAL(modif); int *dimL; dimL=INTEGER(GET_DIM(L)); int *dimG; dimG=INTEGER(GET_DIM(G)); int *dimW; dimW=INTEGER(GET_DIM(W)); int *dimxy; dimxy=INTEGER(GET_DIM(xymod)); int *dimif; dimif=INTEGER(GET_DIM(modif)); SEXP ans;...

...ink that recognizing this as a reduction is going to get you far. A reduction is beneficial if the value reduced is only truly needed outside of a loop. This is not the case here (we are storing/loading from the pointer). Your example is something like WRITEPTR = phi i8* [ outsideval, preheader] [WPTR, loop] store WRITEPTR ... WPTR = getelementptr WRIPTR, 3 If you treat this as a reduction, you will end up with code like (say we used a VF=2): WRITEPTR = phi <2 x i8*> [ <outsideval, 0>, preheader] [WPTR, loop] ptr = WRITEPTR<0> + WRITEPTR<1> store ptr ... WPTR = getele...

Hi folks: Here is the leftover of the previous spin of NVKM GSP RPC fixes, which is handling the return of large GSP message. PATCH 1 and 2 in the previous spin were merged [1], and this spin is based on top of PATCH 1 and PATCH 2 in the previous spin. Besides the support of the large GSP message, kernel doc and many cleanups are introduced according to the comments in the previous spin [2].

...-- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.h @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ uint8_t amdgpu_amdkfd_get_xgmi_hops_count(struct kgd_dev *dst, struct kgd_dev *s pagefault_disable(); \ if ((mmptr) == current->mm) { \ valid = !get_user((dst), (wptr)); \ - } else if (current->mm == NULL) { \ + } else if (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD) { \ use_mm(mmptr); \ valid = !get_user((dst), (wptr)); \ unuse_mm(mmptr); \ -- 2.25.1

Hi Nadav, Arnold, I managed to find some time to work on the pointer reduction, and I got a patch that can make "canVectorize()" pass. Basically what I do is to teach AddReductionVar() about pointers, saying they don't really have an exit instructions, and that (maybe) the final store is a good candidate (is it?). This makes it recognize the writes and reads, but then

...93fefc8..63db84e09408 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.h @@ -192,9 +192,9 @@ uint8_t amdgpu_amdkfd_get_xgmi_hops_count(struct kgd_dev *dst, struct kgd_dev *s if ((mmptr) == current->mm) { \ valid = !get_user((dst), (wptr)); \ } else if (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD) { \ - use_mm(mmptr); \ + kthread_use_mm(mmptr); \ valid = !get_user((dst), (wptr)); \ - unuse_mm(mmptr); \ + kthread_unuse_mm(mmptr); \ } \ pagefault_enable(); \ } \ diff --git a/drivers/gpu/dr...

...8fc689f..b063bd7f41d8 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd.h @@ -192,9 +192,9 @@ uint8_t amdgpu_amdkfd_get_xgmi_hops_count(struct kgd_dev *dst, struct kgd_dev *s if ((mmptr) == current->mm) { \ valid = !get_user((dst), (wptr)); \ } else if (current->mm == NULL) { \ - use_mm(mmptr); \ + kthread_use_mm(mmptr); \ valid = !get_user((dst), (wptr)); \ - unuse_mm(mmptr); \ + kthread_unuse_mm(mmptr); \ } \ pagefault_enable(); \ } \ diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/...

Hi all, this series improves the use_mm / unuse_mm interface by better documenting the assumptions, and my taking the set_fs manipulations spread over the callers into the core API.

Hi all, this series improves the use_mm / unuse_mm interface by better documenting the assumptions, and my taking the set_fs manipulations spread over the callers into the core API.

...eyboard : only mouse */ //#define DEBUG_MOUSE +/* enable synapatic touchpad device model */ +//#define SYNAPTIC + /* Keyboard Controller Commands */ #define KBD_CCMD_READ_MODE 0x20 /* Read mode bits */ #define KBD_CCMD_WRITE_MODE 0x60 /* Write mode bits */ @@ -117,10 +120,12 @@ int rptr, wptr, count; } KBDQueue; +#ifdef SYNAPTIC typedef struct { int absolute; int high; } TouchPad; +#endif typedef struct KBDState { KBDQueue queue; @@ -142,7 +147,9 @@ int mouse_dy; int mouse_dz; uint8_t mouse_buttons; +#ifdef SYNAPTIC TouchPad touchpad; +#endif...

Hi all, this series improves the use_mm / unuse_mm interface by better documenting the assumptions, and my taking the set_fs manipulations spread over the callers into the core API. Changes since v1: - drop a few patches - fix a comment typo - cover the newly merged use_mm/unuse_mm caller in vfio

Hi all, this series improves the use_mm / unuse_mm interface by better documenting the assumptions, and my taking the set_fs manipulations spread over the callers into the core API. Changes since v1: - drop a few patches - fix a comment typo - cover the newly merged use_mm/unuse_mm caller in vfio