Displaying 20 results from an estimated 20000 matches similar to: "How to pick out several infinite values when calculating means?"
2018 Sep 20
3
future time stamps warning
Time stamps are correct and my system time is correct.
I am now tried to use Sys.setFileTime() to update time stamps as proposed.
This does not help.
The windows and debian builds give different reports on the time stamp
issue.
https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/eurostat_3.2.8_20180920_122655/Windows/00check.log
2012 May 31
1
[LLVMdev] Legalizing truncating store using atomic load.
Hi Lei,
Le 31/05/2012 03:44, Lei Mou a écrit :
> Problem solved by returning the second result of the ATOMIC_LOAD_OR node...
You got the chain instead of the loaded value.
IMHO, a better solution would have been to add a Pat<> rule to match
truncstores and expand them into target store/load/and/or.
Pat : <(truncstore16 GPR:$val, MEM:$mem),
(store MEM:$mem,
(or
2014 Jun 17
2
[RFC PATCH 2/2] block: virtio-blk: support multi virt queues per virtio-blk device
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Ming Lei <ming.lei at canonical.com> wrote:
> Firstly this patch supports more than one virtual queues for virtio-blk
> device.
>
> Secondly this patch maps the virtual queue to blk-mq's hardware queue.
>
> With this approach, both scalability and performance problem can be improved.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei at
2014 Jun 17
2
[RFC PATCH 2/2] block: virtio-blk: support multi virt queues per virtio-blk device
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:29 AM, Ming Lei <ming.lei at canonical.com> wrote:
> Firstly this patch supports more than one virtual queues for virtio-blk
> device.
>
> Secondly this patch maps the virtual queue to blk-mq's hardware queue.
>
> With this approach, both scalability and performance problem can be improved.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei at
2010 Nov 25
3
[LLVMdev] how to eliminate dead infinite loops?
On 11/24/2010 06:55 PM, Owen Anderson wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Andrew Clinton wrote:
>
>
>> Most of my programs contain loops that the LoopDeletion pass is unable
>> to remove. It appears that the following code in LoopDeletion.cpp:152
>> is the culprit:
>>
>> ScalarEvolution& SE = getAnalysis<ScalarEvolution>();
>>
2010 Nov 24
0
[LLVMdev] how to eliminate dead infinite loops?
On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Andrew Clinton wrote:
> Most of my programs contain loops that the LoopDeletion pass is unable
> to remove. It appears that the following code in LoopDeletion.cpp:152
> is the culprit:
>
> ScalarEvolution& SE = getAnalysis<ScalarEvolution>();
> const SCEV *S = SE.getMaxBackedgeTakenCount(L);
> if
2006 Feb 21
2
indexing within panels in xyplot
Dear R-helpers,
I need to show a linear fit through a subset of the data within each
combination of levels of two factors. So I prepared an xyplot with
different panels for each level of one of the factors, and different
symbols within each panel for the levels of the second factor. My problem
is selecting the subset of each combination through which the line should
be fit for subsequent
2020 Feb 19
1
[PATCH 1/2] virtio-blk: fix hw_queue stopped on arbitrary error
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:35 PM Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:21:18 +0800
> Ming Lei <tom.leiming at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:38 PM Halil Pasic <pasic at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Since nobody else is going to restart our hw_queue for us, the
> > >
2012 May 31
0
[LLVMdev] Legalizing truncating store using atomic load.
Problem solved by returning the second result of the ATOMIC_LOAD_OR node...
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Lei Mou <lei.mou.uu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Our target only has native support for i32 and f32 types. For data
> types smaller than these, I have to custom lowering truncating store
> using two atomic load instruction (which have the same semantics as
>
2012 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] Question about PTXFrameLowering
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 3:48 AM, Lei Mou <lei.mou.uu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm learning the PTX backend and confused by the following problem. In the
> constructor of PTXFrameLowering, StackAlignment and LocalAreaOffset are
> assigned 2 and -2, respectively. Since PTX has neither stack frame nor
> stack pointer, why StackAlignment and LocalAreaOffset are
2015 Jul 16
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Defining Infinite Loops
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I'm very much in favor of having a firm and clear answer to these
> questions.
>
> I also agree that it is an absolute requirement that LLVM have *some*
> mechanism for supporting both languages with defined behavior for infinite
> loops and a language requirement that all loops
2014 Jul 01
2
[PATCH v3 0/2] block: virtio-blk: support multi vq per virtio-blk
Hi Jens and Rusty,
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Ming Lei <ming.lei at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Ming Lei <ming.lei at canonical.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> These patches try to support multi virtual queues(multi-vq) in one
>> virtio-blk device, and maps each virtual queue(vq) to blk-mq's
>> hardware queue.
>>
2014 Jul 01
2
[PATCH v3 0/2] block: virtio-blk: support multi vq per virtio-blk
Hi Jens and Rusty,
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Ming Lei <ming.lei at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Ming Lei <ming.lei at canonical.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> These patches try to support multi virtual queues(multi-vq) in one
>> virtio-blk device, and maps each virtual queue(vq) to blk-mq's
>> hardware queue.
>>
2010 Nov 26
0
[LLVMdev] how to eliminate dead infinite loops?
On 11/25/2010 12:59 PM, Andrew Clinton wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 06:55 PM, Owen Anderson wrote:
>> On Nov 23, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Andrew Clinton wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Most of my programs contain loops that the LoopDeletion pass is unable
>>> to remove. It appears that the following code in LoopDeletion.cpp:152
>>> is the culprit:
>>>
>>>
2010 Nov 23
5
[LLVMdev] how to eliminate dead infinite loops?
Most of my programs contain loops that the LoopDeletion pass is unable
to remove. It appears that the following code in LoopDeletion.cpp:152
is the culprit:
ScalarEvolution& SE = getAnalysis<ScalarEvolution>();
const SCEV *S = SE.getMaxBackedgeTakenCount(L);
if (isa<SCEVCouldNotCompute>(S))
return Changed;
So, LoopDeletion thinks my loops might be infinite so it
2012 Aug 16
0
[LLVMdev] error: instruction requires: thumb2
Sure. Use legal ARM mode syntax for the instruction.
Specifically, there is no offset immediate for the ARM mode LDREX instruction. It's illegal syntax to supply one, even if it's zero.
-Jim
On Aug 16, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Lei Zhao <leizhao833 at gmail.com> wrote:
> It works. But a follow-up question: why do I have to compile it to thumb mode in order to pass the compilation? Is
2014 May 30
4
[PATCH] block: virtio_blk: don't hold spin lock during world switch
Firstly, it isn't necessary to hold lock of vblk->vq_lock
when notifying hypervisor about queued I/O.
Secondly, virtqueue_notify() will cause world switch and
it may take long time on some hypervisors(such as, qemu-arm),
so it isn't good to hold the lock and block other vCPUs.
On arm64 quad core VM(qemu-kvm), the patch can increase I/O
performance a lot with VIRTIO_RING_F_EVENT_IDX
2014 May 30
4
[PATCH] block: virtio_blk: don't hold spin lock during world switch
Firstly, it isn't necessary to hold lock of vblk->vq_lock
when notifying hypervisor about queued I/O.
Secondly, virtqueue_notify() will cause world switch and
it may take long time on some hypervisors(such as, qemu-arm),
so it isn't good to hold the lock and block other vCPUs.
On arm64 quad core VM(qemu-kvm), the patch can increase I/O
performance a lot with VIRTIO_RING_F_EVENT_IDX
2012 Aug 16
2
[LLVMdev] error: instruction requires: thumb2
It works. But a follow-up question: why do I have to compile it to thumb mode in order to pass the compilation? Is there a way to make it compile to regular arm mode? Thanks.
- Lei
On Aug 16, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Eli Friedman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Lei Zhao <leizhao833 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Everybody,
>>
>> I recently did a cross-compiling
2009 Aug 30
1
Infinite != NaN?
Greetings. I somehow had the impression that an infinite number, as obtained by dividing by zero, for instance, would be flagged as both missing ("NA") and not a number ("NaN"). It appears that I was wrong on both counts, although the is.finite function correctly returns FALSE in such a case. Please see the appended for some details. I guess that the bottom line is that R