Search Results

Search found 31989 results on 1280 pages for 'newtons method'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 10/1280 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • AMD 24 core server memory bandwidth

    - by ntherning
    I need some help to determine whether the memory bandwidth I'm seeing under Linux on my server is normal or not. Here's the server spec: HP ProLiant DL165 G7 2x AMD Opteron 6164 HE 12-Core 40 GB RAM (10 x 4GB DDR1333) Debian 6.0 Using mbw on this server I get the following numbers: foo1:~# mbw -n 3 1024 Long uses 8 bytes. Allocating 2*134217728 elements = 2147483648 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 3 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58047 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1764.082 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58012 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1765.152 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58010 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1765.201 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58023 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1764.811 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.36174 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2830.778 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.35869 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2854.817 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.35848 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2856.481 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.35964 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2847.310 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23546 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4348.860 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23544 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4349.230 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23544 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4349.359 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23545 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4349.149 MiB/s On one of my other servers (based on Intel Xeon E3-1270): foo2:~# mbw -n 3 1024 Long uses 8 bytes. Allocating 2*134217728 elements = 2147483648 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 3 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18960 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5400.901 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18922 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5411.690 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18944 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5405.491 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18942 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5406.024 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14838 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6901.200 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14818 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6910.561 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14820 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6909.628 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14825 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6907.127 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04362 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 23477.623 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04262 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 24025.151 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04258 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 24048.849 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04294 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 23847.599 MiB/s For reference here's what I get on my Intel based laptop: laptop:~$ mbw -n 3 1024 Long uses 8 bytes. Allocating 2*134217728 elements = 2147483648 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 3 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.40566 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2524.269 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.38458 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2662.638 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.38876 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2634.043 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.39300 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2605.600 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30707 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3334.745 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30425 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3365.653 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30342 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3374.849 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30491 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3358.328 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.07875 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 13003.670 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.08374 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 12228.034 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.07635 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 13411.216 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.07961 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 12862.006 MiB/s So according to mbw my laptop is 3 times faster than the server!!! Please help me explain this. I've also tried to mount a ram disk and use dd to benchmark it and I get similar differences so I don't think mbw is to blame. I've checked the BIOS settings and the memory seem to be running at full speed. According to the hosting company the modules are all OK. Could this have something to do with NUMA? It seems like Node Interleaving is disabled on this server. Will enabling it (thus turning off NUMA) make a difference? foo1:~# numactl --hardware available: 4 nodes (0-3) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 node 0 size: 8190 MB node 0 free: 7898 MB node 1 cpus: 6 7 8 9 10 11 node 1 size: 12288 MB node 1 free: 12073 MB node 2 cpus: 18 19 20 21 22 23 node 2 size: 12288 MB node 2 free: 12034 MB node 3 cpus: 12 13 14 15 16 17 node 3 size: 8192 MB node 3 free: 8032 MB node distances: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 20 20 20 1: 20 10 20 20 2: 20 20 10 20 3: 20 20 20 10

    Read the article

  • Enum.HasFlag method in C# 4.0

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    Enums in dot net programming is a great facility and we all used it to increase code readability. In earlier version of .NET framework we don’t have any method anything that will check whether a value is assigned to it or not. In C# 4.0 we have new static method called HasFlag which will check that particular value is assigned or not. Let’s take an example for that. First I have created a enum called PaymentType which could have two values Credit Card or Debit Card. Just like following. public enum PaymentType { DebitCard=1, CreditCard=2 } Now We are going to assigned one of the value to this enum instance and then with the help of HasFlag method we are going to check whether particular value is assigned to enum or not like following. protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { PaymentType paymentType = PaymentType.CreditCard; if (paymentType.HasFlag(PaymentType.DebitCard)) { Response.Write("Process Debit Card"); } if (paymentType.HasFlag(PaymentType.CreditCard)) { Response.Write("Process Credit Card"); } } Now Let’s check out in browser as following. As expected it will print process Credit Card as we have assigned that value to enum. That’s it It’s so simple and cool. Stay tuned for more.. Happy Programming.. Technorati Tags: Enum,C#4.0,ASP.NET 4.0

    Read the article

  • Why not to use StackTrace to find what method called you

    - by Alex.Davies
    Our obfuscator, SmartAssembly, does some pretty crazy reflection. It's an obfuscator, it's sort of its job to do things in the most awkward way possible. But sometimes, you can go too far. One such time is this little gem from the strings encoding feature: StackTrace stackTrace = new StackTrace(); StackFrame frame = stackTrace.GetFrame(1); Type ownerType = frame.GetMethod().DeclaringType; It's designed to find the type where the calling method is defined. A user found that strings encoding occasionally broke on x64 systems. Very strange. After some debugging (thank god for Reflector Pro, it would be impossible to debug processed assemblies without it) I found that the ownerType I got back was wrong. The reason is that the x64 JIT does tail call optimisation. This saves space on the stack, and speeds things up, by throwing away a method's stack frame if the last thing that it calls is the only thing returned. When this happens, the call to StackTrace faithfully tells you that the calling method is the one that called the one we really wanted. So using StackTrace isn't safe for anything other than debugging, and it will make your code fail in unpredictable ways. Don't use it!

    Read the article

  • Intercept method calls in Groovy for automatic type conversion

    - by kerry
    One of the cooler things you can do with groovy is automatic type conversion.  If you want to convert an object to another type, many times all you have to do is invoke the ‘as’ keyword: def letters = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz' as List But, what if you are wanting to do something a little fancier, like converting a String to a Date? def christmas = '12-25-2010' as Date ERROR org.codehaus.groovy.runtime.typehandling.GroovyCastException: Cannot cast object '12-25-2010' with class java.lang.String' to class 'java.util.Date' No bueno! I want to be able to do custom type conversions so that my application can do a simple String to Date conversion. Enter the metaMethod. You can intercept method calls in Groovy using the following method: def intercept(name, params, closure) { def original = from.metaClass.getMetaMethod(name, params) from.metaClass[name] = { Class clazz -> closure() original.doMethodInvoke(delegate, clazz) } } Using this method, and a little syntactic sugar, we create the following ‘Convert’ class: // Convert.from( String ).to( Date ).using { } class Convert { private from private to private Convert(clazz) { from = clazz } static def from(clazz) { new Convert(clazz) } def to(clazz) { to = clazz return this } def using(closure) { def originalAsType = from.metaClass.getMetaMethod('asType', [] as Class[]) from.metaClass.asType = { Class clazz -> if( clazz == to ) { closure.setProperty('value', delegate) closure(delegate) } else { originalAsType.doMethodInvoke(delegate, clazz) } } } } Now, we can make the following statement to add the automatic date conversion: Convert.from( String ).to( Date ).using { new java.text.SimpleDateFormat('MM-dd-yyyy').parse(value) } def christmas = '12-25-2010' as Date Groovy baby!

    Read the article

  • Handling Indirection and keeping layers of method calls, objects, and even xml files straight

    - by Cervo
    How do you keep everything straight as you trace deeply into a piece of software through multiple method calls, object constructors, object factories, and even spring wiring. I find that 4 or 5 method calls are easy to keep in my head, but once you are going to 8 or 9 calls deep it gets hard to keep track of everything. Are there strategies for keeping everything straight? In particular, I might be looking for how to do task x, but then as I trace down (or up) I lose track of that goal, or I find multiple layers need changes, but then I lose track of which changes as I trace all the way down. Or I have tentative plans that I find out are not valid but then during the tracing I forget that the plan is invalid and try to consider the same plan all over again killing time.... Is there software that might be able to help out? grep and even eclipse can help me to do the actual tracing from a call to the definition but I'm more worried about keeping track of everything including the de-facto plan for what has to change (which might vary as you go down/up and realize the prior plan was poor). In the past I have dealt with a few big methods that you trace and pretty much can figure out what is going on within a few calls. But now there are dozens of really tiny methods, many just a single call to another method/constructor and it is hard to keep track of them all.

    Read the article

  • Collection RemoveAll Extension Method

    - by João Angelo
    I had previously posted a RemoveAll extension method for the Dictionary<K,V> class, now it’s time to have one for the Collection<T> class. The signature is the same as in the corresponding method already available in List<T> and the implementation relies on the RemoveAt method to perform the actual removal of each element. Finally, here’s the code: public static class CollectionExtensions { /// <summary> /// Removes from the target collection all elements that match the specified predicate. /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="T">The type of elements in the target collection.</typeparam> /// <param name="collection">The target collection.</param> /// <param name="match">The predicate used to match elements.</param> /// <exception cref="ArgumentNullException"> /// The target collection is a null reference. /// <br />-or-<br /> /// The match predicate is a null reference. /// </exception> /// <returns>Returns the number of elements removed.</returns> public static int RemoveAll<T>(this Collection<T> collection, Predicate<T> match) { if (collection == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("collection"); if (match == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("match"); int count = 0; for (int i = collection.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { if (match(collection[i])) { collection.RemoveAt(i); count++; } } return count; } }

    Read the article

  • Introducing a (new) test method to a team

    - by Jon List
    A couple of months ago i was hired in a new job. (I'm fresh out of my Masters in software engineering) The company mainly consists of ERP consultants, but I was hired in their fairly small web department (6 developers), our main task is ERP/ecom integration (ERP-integrated web shops). The department is growing, and recently my manager asked me to start thinking about introducing tests to the team, i love a challenge, but frankly I'm a bit scared (I'm the least experience member of the team). Currently the method of testing is clicking around in the web shop and asking the customer if the products are there, if they look okay, and if orders are posted correctly to the ERP. We are getting a lot of support cases on previous projects, where a customer or a customer's customer have run into errors, which - i suppose - is why my manager wants more structured testing. Off the top of my head, I though of some (obvious?) improvements, like looking at the requirement specification, having an issue tracker, enabling team members to register their time on a "tests"-line on the budget, and to circulate tasks amongst members of the team. But as i see it we have three main challenges: general website testing. (javascript, C#, ASP.NET and CMS integration tests) (live) ERP integration testing (customers rarely want to pay for test environments). adopting a method in the team I like the responsibility, but I am afraid that I'm in a little bit over my head. I expect that my manager expects me to set up some kind of workshop for the team where I present some techniques and ideas and where we(the team) can find some solutions together. What I learned in school was mostly unit testing and program verification, not so much testing across multiple systems and applications. What I'm looking for here, is references/advice/pointers/anecdotes; anything that might help me to get smarter and to improve the current method of my team. Thanks!! (TL;DR: read the bold parts)

    Read the article

  • Oracle Unified Method 5 Essentials Exam (Beta)

    - by user535886
    Oracle Unified Method 5 Essentials (1Z1-568) exam The Oracle Unified Method Certified Implementation Specialist Certification identifies professionals who are skilled in Oracle’s all inclusive methodology. The certification covers the core features the Oracle Unified Method suite, including but not limited to, Focus Areas, Use Cases, and Requirements Gathering. The certification proves a baseline of the consultant’s knowledge and allows the implementation team to work as a cohesive team from day 1. Up-to-date training and field experience are highly recommended. Target Audience: implementation consultants. We are offering to Oracle Partners & Employees beta exam vouchers to earn Oracle Implementation Specialist credential. Exam appointments will be open soon for scheduling at authorized Pearson Vue testing centers. Due to the high demand we process the requests on a first-come, first-served basis. If you would like to request a voucher, please send an e-mail to [email protected] with the following information for each participant: first and last name; business email address, company name, and exam name. 

    Read the article

  • Is this method of writing Unit Tests correct?

    - by aspdotnetuser
    I have created a small C# project to help me learn how to write good unit tests. I know that one important rule of unit testing is to test the smallest 'unit' of code possible so that if it fails you know exactly what part of the code needs to fixed. I need help with the following before I continue to implement more unit tests for the project: If I have a Car class, for example, that creates a new Car object which has various attributes that are calculated when its' constructor method is called, would the two following tests be considered as overkill? Should there be one test that tests all calculated attributes of the Car object instead? [Test] public void CarEngineCalculatedValue() { BusinessObjects.Car car= new BusinessObjects.Car(); Assert.GreaterOrEqual(car.Engine, 1); } [Test] public void CarNameCalculatedValue() { BusinessObjects.Car car= new BusinessObjects.Car(); Assert.IsNotNull(car.Name); } Should I have the above two test methods to test these things or should I have one test method that asserts the Car object has first been created and then test these things in the same test method?

    Read the article

  • Override methods should call base method?

    - by Trevor Pilley
    I'm just running NDepend against some code that I have written and one of the warnings is Overrides of Method() should call base.Method(). The places this occurs are where I have a base class which has virtual properties and methods with default behaviour but which can be overridden by a class which inherits from the base class and doesn't call the overridden method. For example, in the base class I have a property defined like this: protected virtual char CloseQuote { get { return '"'; } } And then in an inheriting class which uses a different close quote: protected override char CloseQuote { get { return ']'; } } Not all classes which inherit from the base class use different quote characters hence my initial design. The alternatives I thought of were have get/set properties in the base class with the defaults set in the constructor: protected BaseClass() { this.CloseQuote = '"'; } protected char CloseQuote { get; set; } public InheritingClass() { this.CloseQuote = ']'; } Or make the base class require the values as constructor args: protected BaseClass(char closeQuote, ...) { this.CloseQuote = '"'; } protected char CloseQuote { get; private set; } public InheritingClass() base (closeQuote: ']', ...) { } Should I use virtual in a scenario where the base implementation may be replaced instead of extended or should I opt for one of the alternatives I thought of? If so, which would be preferable and why?

    Read the article

  • how to make my method running on the template of google-app-engine..

    - by zjm1126
    the model is : class someModel(db.Model): name = db.StringProperty() def name_is_sss(self): return self.name=='sss' the view is : a=someModel() a.name='sss' path = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), os.path.join('templates', 'blog/a.html')) self.response.out.write(template.render(path, {'a':a})) and the html is : {{ a.name_is_sss }} the page shows : True so i want to make it more useful, and like this: the model: class someModel(db.Model): name = db.StringProperty() def name_is_x(self,x): return self.name==x the html is : {% a.name_is_x 'www'%} or {{ a.name_is_x 'www'}} but the error is : TemplateSyntaxError: Invalid block tag: 'a.name_is_x' or TemplateSyntaxError: Could not parse the remainder: 'www' so how to make my method running thanks

    Read the article

  • Java: what is the class for the isBinary-method?

    - by HH
    I am accustomed to java.io.* and java.util.* but not to the tree: com.starbase.util Class FileUtils java.lang.Object | +--com.starbase.util.FileUtils Source. So which class should I import to use the isBinary-method? Do I do "import java.lang.Object;" or "import java.lang.Object.com.starbase.util.FileUtils;"?

    Read the article

  • Java: If I overwrite the .equals method, can I still test for reference equality with ==?

    - by shots fired
    I have the following situation: I need to sort trees based by height, so I made the Tree's comparable using the height attribute. However, I was also told to overwrite the equals and hashCode methods to avoid unpredictable behaviour. Still, sometimes I may want to compare the references of the roots or something along those lines using ==. Is that still possible or does the == comparison call the equals method?

    Read the article

  • is a factory pattern to prevent multuple instances for same object (instance that is Equal) good design?

    - by dsollen
    I have a number of objects storing state. There are essentially two types of fields. The ones that uniquly define what the object is (what node, what edge etc), and the oens that store state describing how these things are connected (this node is connected to these edges, this edge is part of these paths) etc. My model is updating the state variables using package methdos, so these objects all act as immutable to anyone not in Model scope. All Objects extend one base type. I've toyed with the idea of a Factory approch which accepts a Builder object and construct the applicable object. However, if an instance of the object already exists (ie would return true if I created the object defined by the builder and passed it to the equal method for the existing instance) the factory returns the current object instead of creating a new instance. Because the Equal method would only compare what uniquly defines the type of object (this is node A nto node B) but won't check the dynamic state stuff (node A is currently connected to nodes C and E) this would be a way of ensuring anyone that wants my Node A automatically knows it's state connections. More importantly it would prevent aliasing nightmares of someone trying to pass an instance of node A with different state then the node A in my model has. I've never heard of this pattern before, and it's a bit odd. I would have to do some overiding of serlization methods to make it work (ensure when I read in a serilized object I add it to my facotry list of known instances, and/or return an existing factory in it's place), as well as using a weakHashMap as if it was a weakHashSet to know rather an instance exists without worrying about a quasi-memory leak occuring. I don't know if this is too confusing or prone to it's own obscure bugs. One thing I know is that plugins interface with lowest level hardware. The plugins have to be able to return state taht is different then my memory; to tell my memory when it's own state is inconsistent. I believe this is possible despit their fetching objects that exist in my memory; we allow building of objects without checking their consistency with the model until the addToModel is called anyways; and the existing plugins design was written before all this extra state existed and worked fine without ever being aware of it. Should I just be using some other design to avoid this crazyness? (I have another question to that affect I'm posting).

    Read the article

  • Is there a factory pattern to prevent multiple instances for same object (instance that is Equal) good design?

    - by dsollen
    I have a number of objects storing state. There are essentially two types of fields. The ones that uniquely define what the object is (what node, what edge etc), and the others that store state describing how these things are connected (this node is connected to these edges, this edge is part of these paths) etc. My model is updating the state variables using package methods, so all these objects act as immutable to anyone not in Model scope. All Objects extend one base type. I've toyed with the idea of a Factory approach which accepts a Builder object and constructs the applicable object. However, if an instance of the object already exists (ie would return true if I created the object defined by the builder and passed it to the equal method for the existing instance) the factory returns the current object instead of creating a new instance. Because the Equal method would only compare what uniquely defines the type of object (this is node A to node B) but won't check the dynamic state stuff (node A is currently connected to nodes C and E) this would be a way of ensuring anyone that wants my Node A automatically knows its state connections. More importantly it would prevent aliasing nightmares of someone trying to pass an instance of node A with different state then the node A in my model has. I've never heard of this pattern before, and it's a bit odd. I would have to do some overriding of serialization methods to make it work (ensure that when I read in a serilized object I add it to my facotry list of known instances, and/or return an existing factory in its place), as well as using a weakHashMap as if it was a weakHashSet to know whether an instance exists without worrying about a quasi-memory leak occuring. I don't know if this is too confusing or prone to its own obscure bugs. One thing I know is that plugins interface with lowest level hardware. The plugins have to be able to return state that is different than my memory; to tell my memory when its own state is inconsistent. I believe this is possible despite their fetching objects that exist in my memory; we allow building of objects without checking their consistency with the model until the addToModel is called anyways; and the existing plugins design was written before all this extra state existed and worked fine without ever being aware of it. Should I just be using some other design to avoid this crazyness? (I have another question to that affect that I'm posting).

    Read the article

  • .NET Lambda Pass Method Parameter

    - by RM
    Hi All, I hope i'm missing something obvious, but I'm having some troubles defining a method that takes a parameter of a method to fetch the method information for the passed method. I do NOT want actually execute the method. I want to be able to do: busObject.SetResolverMethod<ISomeInterface>(x=>x.GetNameById); Where GetNameById is a method defined on the interface ISomeInterface. In this case, an example of the method being passed in's signature would be: MyVarA GetNameById(int id){ .... } In the above example, the SetResolverMethod's body should be able to return / store the string "GetNameById". There is no standard signature the method being passed in will conform to (except that it will always return an object of some kind). Currently I'm setting the method as a string (i.e. "GetNameById"), but I want it to be compile time checked, hence this question.

    Read the article

  • How do I Moq It.IsAny for an array in the setup of a method?

    - by Graham
    I'm brand new to Moq (using v 4) and am struggling a little with the documentation. What I'm trying to do is to Moq a method that takes a byte array and returns an object. Something like: decoderMock.Setup(d => d.Decode(????).Returns(() => tagMock.Object); The ???? is where the byte[] should be, but I can't work out how to make it so that I don't care what's in the byte array, just return the mocked object I've already set up. Moq.It.IsAny expects a generic. Any help please?

    Read the article

  • Automatically decorating every instance method in a class

    - by max
    I want to apply the same decorator to every method in a given class, other than those that start and end with __. It seems to me it should be doable using a class decorator. Are there any pitfalls to be aware of? Ideally, I'd also like to be able to: disable this mechanism for some methods by marking them with a special decorator enable this mechanism for subclasses as well enable this mechanism even for methods that are added to this class in runtime [Note: I'm using Python 3.2, so I'm fine if this relies on features added recently.] Here's my attempt: _methods_to_skip = {} def apply(decorator): def apply_decorator(cls): for method_name, method in get_all_instance_methods(cls): if (cls, method) in _methods_to_skip: continue if method_name[:2] == `__` and method_name[-2:] == `__`: continue cls.method_name = decorator(method) return apply_decorator def dont_decorate(method): _methods_to_skip.add((get_class_from_method(method), method)) return method Here are things I have problems with: how to implement get_all_instance_methods function not sure if my cls.method_name = decorator(method) line is correct how to do the same to any methods added to a class in runtime how to apply this to subclasses how to implement get_class_from_method

    Read the article

  • What are the interets of synthetic methods?

    - by romaintaz
    Problem One friend suggested an interesting problem. Given the following code: public class OuterClass { private String message = "Hello World"; private class InnerClass { private String getMessage() { return message; } } } From an external class, how may I print the message variable content? Of course, changing the accessibility of methods or fields is not allowed. (the source here, but it is a french blog) Solution The code to solve this problem is the following: try { Method m = OuterClass.class.getDeclaredMethod("access$000", OuterClass.class); OuterClass outerClass = new OuterClass(); System.out.println(m.invoke(outerClass, outerClass)); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } Note that the access$000 method name is not really standard (even if this format is the one that is strongly recommanded), and some JVM will name this method access$0. Thus, a better solution is to check for synthetic methods: Method method = null; int i = 0; while ((method == null) && (i < OuterClass.class.getDeclaredMethods().length)) { if (OuterClass.class.getDeclaredMethods()[i].isSynthetic()) { method = OuterClass.class.getDeclaredMethods()[i]; } i++; } if (method != null) { try { System.out.println(method.invoke(null, new OuterClass())); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } So the interesting point in this problem is to highlight the use of synthetic methods. With these methods, I can access a private field as it was done in the solution. Of course, I need to use reflection, and I think that the use of this kind of thing can be quite dangerous... Question What is the interest - for me, as a developer - of a synthetic method? What can be a good situation where using the synthetic can be useful?

    Read the article

  • What's causing "NoMethodError: undefined method `include?' for nil:NilClass"

    - by NudeCanalTroll
    I have a Book model in my Rails application, with various properties (aka columns in the book db table). One of these properties is "ranking". Recently, may app has started to throw NoMethodError: undefined method 'include?' for nil:NilClass for the following code: def some_method(book, another_arg) return book.ranking unless book.ranking.blank? ... end However, it's not consistent. The vast majority of the time, accessing book.ranking works -- the error is thrown maybe 2-4% of the time. If I change the code to book[:ranking] or book['ranking'] instead of book.ranking, it works 100% of the time. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How can I make a recursive version of my iterative method?

    - by user247679
    Greetings. I am trying to write a recursive function in Java that prints the numbers one through n. (n being the parameter that you send the function.) An iterative solution is pretty straightforward: public static void printNumbers(int n){ for(int i = 1; i <= n; i++){ System.out.println(i); i++; } As a novice programmer, I'm having troubles figuring out how a recursive version of this method would work. Any bright ideas? Thanks for reading my problem!

    Read the article

  • help with fixing fwts errors log

    - by jasmines
    Here is an extract of results.log: MTRR validation. Test 1 of 3: Validate the kernel MTRR IOMEM setup. FAILED [MEDIUM] MTRRIncorrectAttr: Test 1, Memory range 0xc0000000 to 0xdfffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Combining. FAILED [MEDIUM] MTRRIncorrectAttr: Test 1, Memory range 0xfee01000 to 0xffffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Protect. ==================================================================================================== Test 1 of 1: Kernel log error check. Kernel message: [ 0.208079] [Firmware Bug]: ACPI: BIOS _OSI(Linux) query ignored ADVICE: This is not exactly a failure mode but a warning from the kernel. The _OSI() method has implemented a match to the 'Linux' query in the DSDT and this is redundant because the ACPI driver matches onto the Windows _OSI strings by default. FAILED [HIGH] KlogACPIErrorMethodExecutionParse: Test 1, HIGH Kernel message: [ 3.512783] ACPI Error : Method parse/execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DOD] (Node f7425858), AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT (20110623/psparse-536) ADVICE: This is a bug picked up by the kernel, but as yet, the firmware test suite has no diagnostic advice for this particular problem. Found 1 unique errors in kernel log. ==================================================================================================== Check if system is using latest microcode. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cannot read microcode file /usr/share/misc/intel-microcode.dat. Aborted test, initialisation failed. ==================================================================================================== MSR register tests. FAILED [MEDIUM] MSRCPUsInconsistent: Test 1, MSR SYSENTER_ESP (0x175) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0xffffffffffffffff). MSR CPU 0 -> 0xf7bb9c40 vs CPU 1 -> 0xf7bc7c40 FAILED [MEDIUM] MSRCPUsInconsistent: Test 1, MSR MISC_ENABLE (0x1a0) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0x400c51889). MSR CPU 0 -> 0x850088 vs CPU 1 -> 0x850089 ==================================================================================================== Checks firmware has set PCI Express MaxReadReq to a higher value on non-motherboard devices. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 1: Check firmware settings MaxReadReq for PCI Express devices. MaxReadReq for pci://00:00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801I (ICH9 Family) HD Audio Controller (rev 03) is low (128) [Audio device]. MaxReadReq for pci://00:02:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation PRO/Wireless 5100 AGN [Shiloh] Network Connection is low (128) [Network controller]. FAILED [LOW] LowMaxReadReq: Test 1, 2 devices have low MaxReadReq settings. Firmware may have configured these too low. ADVICE: The MaxReadRequest size is set too low and will affect performance. It will provide excellent bus sharing at the cost of bus data transfer rates. Although not a critical issue, it may be worth considering setting the MaxReadRequest size to 256 or 512 to increase throughput on the PCI Express bus. Some drivers (for example the Brocade Fibre Channel driver) allow one to override the firmware settings. Where possible, this BIOS configuration setting is worth increasing it a little more for better performance at a small reduction of bus sharing. ==================================================================================================== PCIe ASPM check. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 2: PCIe ASPM ACPI test. PCIE ASPM is not controlled by Linux kernel. ADVICE: BIOS reports that Linux kernel should not modify ASPM settings that BIOS configured. It can be intentional because hardware vendors identified some capability bugs between the motherboard and the add-on cards. Test 2 of 2: PCIe ASPM registers test. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.01h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.01h L1 not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 02h:00h.00h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 02h:00h.00h L1 not enabled. PASSED: Test 2, PCIE aspm setting matched was matched. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.05h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, RP 00h:1Ch.05h L1 not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 85h:00h.00h L0s not enabled. WARNING: Test 2, Device 85h:00h.00h L1 not enabled. PASSED: Test 2, PCIE aspm setting matched was matched. ==================================================================================================== Extract and analyse Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI). Test 1 of 2: Check Windows Management Instrumentation in DSDT Found WMI Method WMAA with GUID: 5FB7F034-2C63-45E9-BE91-3D44E2C707E4, Instance 0x01 Found WMI Event, Notifier ID: 0x80, GUID: 95F24279-4D7B-4334-9387-ACCDC67EF61C, Instance 0x01 PASSED: Test 1, GUID 95F24279-4D7B-4334-9387-ACCDC67EF61C is handled by driver hp-wmi (Vendor: HP). Found WMI Event, Notifier ID: 0xa0, GUID: 2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0, Instance 0x01 FAILED [MEDIUM] WMIUnknownGUID: Test 1, GUID 2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0 is unknown to the kernel, a driver may need to be implemented for this GUID. ADVICE: A WMI driver probably needs to be written for this event. It can checked for using: wmi_has_guid("2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0"). One can install a notify handler using wmi_install_notify_handler("2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0", handler, NULL). http://lwn.net/Articles/391230 describes how to write an appropriate driver. Found WMI Object, Object ID AB, GUID: 05901221-D566-11D1-B2F0-00A0C9062910, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Method WMBA with GUID: 1F4C91EB-DC5C-460B-951D-C7CB9B4B8D5E, Instance 0x01 Found WMI Object, Object ID BC, GUID: 2D114B49-2DFB-4130-B8FE-4A3C09E75133, Instance 0x7f, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BD, GUID: 988D08E3-68F4-4C35-AF3E-6A1B8106F83C, Instance 0x19, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BE, GUID: 14EA9746-CE1F-4098-A0E0-7045CB4DA745, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BF, GUID: 322F2028-0F84-4901-988E-015176049E2D, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BG, GUID: 8232DE3D-663D-4327-A8F4-E293ADB9BF05, Instance 0x01, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BH, GUID: 8F1F6436-9F42-42C8-BADC-0E9424F20C9A, Instance 0x00, Flags: 00 Found WMI Object, Object ID BI, GUID: 8F1F6435-9F42-42C8-BADC-0E9424F20C9A, Instance 0x00, Flags: 00 Found WMI Method WMAC with GUID: 7391A661-223A-47DB-A77A-7BE84C60822D, Instance 0x01 Found WMI Object, Object ID BJ, GUID: DF4E63B6-3BBC-4858-9737-C74F82F821F3, Instance 0x05, Flags: 00 ==================================================================================================== Disassemble DSDT to check for _OSI("Linux"). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 1: Disassemble DSDT to check for _OSI("Linux"). This is not strictly a failure mode, it just alerts one that this has been defined in the DSDT and probably should be avoided since the Linux ACPI driver matches onto the Windows _OSI strings { If (_OSI ("Linux")) { Store (0x03E8, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2001")) { Store (0x07D1, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2001 SP1")) { Store (0x07D1, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2001 SP2")) { Store (0x07D2, OSYS) } If (_OSI ("Windows 2006")) { Store (0x07D6, OSYS) } If (LAnd (MPEN, LEqual (OSYS, 0x07D1))) { TRAP (0x01, 0x48) } TRAP (0x03, 0x35) } WARNING: Test 1, DSDT implements a deprecated _OSI("Linux") test. ==================================================================================================== 0 passed, 0 failed, 1 warnings, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only. ==================================================================================================== ACPI DSDT Method Semantic Tests. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP Failed to install global event handler. Test 22 of 93: Check _PSR (Power Source). ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 22, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_SB_.AC__._PSR'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 22, \_SB_.AC__._PSR correctly acquired and released locks 16 times. Test 35 of 93: Check _TMP (Thermal Zone Current Temp). ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 35, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_TZ_.DTSZ._TMP'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.DTSZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 14 times. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 35, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_TZ_.CPUZ._TMP'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.CPUZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 10 times. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 35, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_TZ_.SKNZ._TMP'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.SKNZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 10 times. PASSED: Test 35, _TMP correctly returned sane looking value 0x00000b4c (289.2 degrees K) PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.BATZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 9 times. PASSED: Test 35, _TMP correctly returned sane looking value 0x00000aac (273.2 degrees K) PASSED: Test 35, \_TZ_.FDTZ._TMP correctly acquired and released locks 7 times. Test 46 of 93: Check _DIS (Disable). FAILED [MEDIUM] MethodShouldReturnNothing: Test 46, \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.COM1._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. Object returned: INTEGER: 0x00000000 ADVICE: This probably won't cause any errors, but it should be fixed as the AML code is not conforming to the expected behaviour as described in the ACPI specification. FAILED [MEDIUM] MethodShouldReturnNothing: Test 46, \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.LPT0._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. Object returned: INTEGER: 0x00000000 ADVICE: This probably won't cause any errors, but it should be fixed as the AML code is not conforming to the expected behaviour as described in the ACPI specification. Test 61 of 93: Check _WAK (System Wake). Test _WAK(1) System Wake, State S1. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(2) System Wake, State S2. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(3) System Wake, State S3. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(4) System Wake, State S4. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test _WAK(5) System Wake, State S5. ACPICA Exception AE_AML_INFINITE_LOOP during execution of method COMP WARNING: Test 61, Detected an infinite loop when evaluating method '\_WAK'. ADVICE: This may occur because we are emulating the execution in this test environment and cannot handshake with the embedded controller or jump to the BIOS via SMIs. However, the fact that AML code spins forever means that lockup conditions are not being checked for in the AML bytecode. Test 87 of 93: Check _BCL (Query List of Brightness Control Levels Supported). Package has 2 elements: 00: INTEGER: 0x00000000 01: INTEGER: 0x00000000 FAILED [MEDIUM] Method_BCLElementCount: Test 87, Method _BCL should return a package of more than 2 integers, got just 2. Test 88 of 93: Check _BCM (Set Brightness Level). ACPICA Exception AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT during execution of method _BCM FAILED [CRITICAL] AEAMLPackgeLimit: Test 88, Detected error 'Package limit' when evaluating '\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0.DD02._BCM'. ==================================================================================================== ACPI table settings sanity checks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 1: Check ACPI tables. PASSED: Test 1, Table APIC passed. Table ECDT not present to check. FAILED [MEDIUM] FADT32And64BothDefined: Test 1, FADT 32 bit FIRMWARE_CONTROL is non-zero, and X_FIRMWARE_CONTROL is also non-zero. Section 5.2.9 of the ACPI specification states that if the FIRMWARE_CONTROL is non-zero then X_FIRMWARE_CONTROL must be set to zero. ADVICE: The FADT FIRMWARE_CTRL is a 32 bit pointer that points to the physical memory address of the Firmware ACPI Control Structure (FACS). There is also an extended 64 bit version of this, the X_FIRMWARE_CTRL pointer that also can point to the FACS. Section 5.2.9 of the ACPI specification states that if the X_FIRMWARE_CTRL field contains a non zero value then the FIRMWARE_CTRL field *must* be zero. This error is also detected by the Linux kernel. If FIRMWARE_CTRL and X_FIRMWARE_CTRL are defined, then the kernel just uses the 64 bit version of the pointer. PASSED: Test 1, Table HPET passed. PASSED: Test 1, Table MCFG passed. PASSED: Test 1, Table RSDT passed. PASSED: Test 1, Table RSDP passed. Table SBST not present to check. PASSED: Test 1, Table XSDT passed. ==================================================================================================== Re-assemble DSDT and find syntax errors and warnings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test 1 of 2: Disassemble and reassemble DSDT FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError4043: Test 1, Assembler error in line 2261 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 02258| 0x00000000, // Range Minimum 02259| 0xFEDFFFFF, // Range Maximum 02260| 0x00000000, // Translation Offset 02261| 0x00000000, // Length | ^ | error 4043: Invalid combination of Length and Min/Max fixed flags 02262| ,, _Y0E, AddressRangeMemory, TypeStatic) 02263| DWordMemory (ResourceProducer, PosDecode, MinFixed, MaxFixed, Cacheable, ReadWrite, 02264| 0x00000000, // Granularity ==================================================================================================== ADVICE: (for error #4043): This occurs if the length is zero and just one of the resource MIF/MAF flags are set, or the length is non-zero and resource MIF/MAF flags are both set. These are illegal combinations and need to be fixed. See section 6.4.3.5 Address Space Resource Descriptors of version 4.0a of the ACPI specification for more details. FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError4050: Test 1, Assembler error in line 2268 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 02265| 0xFEE01000, // Range Minimum 02266| 0xFFFFFFFF, // Range Maximum 02267| 0x00000000, // Translation Offset 02268| 0x011FEFFF, // Length | ^ | error 4050: Length is not equal to fixed Min/Max window 02269| ,, , AddressRangeMemory, TypeStatic) 02270| }) 02271| Method (_CRS, 0, Serialized) ==================================================================================================== ADVICE: (for error #4050): The minimum address is greater than the maximum address. This is illegal. FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 1, Assembler error in line 8885 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 08882| Method (_DIS, 0, NotSerialized) 08883| { 08884| DSOD (0x02) 08885| Return (0x00) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_DIS) 08886| } 08887| 08888| Method (_SRS, 1, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 1, Assembler error in line 9195 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09192| Method (_DIS, 0, NotSerialized) 09193| { 09194| DSOD (0x01) 09195| Return (0x00) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_DIS) 09196| } 09197| 09198| Method (_SRS, 1, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1127: Test 1, Assembler error in line 9242 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09239| CreateWordField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y21._MAX, MAX2) 09240| CreateByteField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y21._LEN, LEN2) 09241| CreateWordField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y22._INT, IRQ0) 09242| CreateWordField (CRES, \_SB.PCI0.LPCB.SIO.LPT0._CRS._Y23._DMA, DMA0) | ^ | warning level 0 1127: ResourceTag smaller than Field (Tag: 8 bits, Field: 16 bits) 09243| If (RLPD) 09244| { 09245| Store (0x00, Local0) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1128: Test 1, Assembler error in line 18682 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18679| Store (0x01, Index (DerefOf (Index (Local0, 0x02)), 0x01)) 18680| If (And (WDPE, 0x40)) 18681| { 18682| Wait (\_SB.BEVT, 0x10) | ^ | warning level 0 1128: Result is not used, possible operator timeout will be missed 18683| } 18684| 18685| Store (BRID, Index (DerefOf (Index (Local0, 0x02)), 0x02)) ==================================================================================================== ADVICE: (for warning level 0 #1128): The operation can possibly timeout, and hence the return value indicates an timeout error. However, because the return value is not checked this very probably indicates that the code is buggy. A possible scenario is that a mutex times out and the code attempts to access data in a critical region when it should not. This will lead to undefined behaviour. This should be fixed. Table DSDT (0) reassembly: Found 2 errors, 4 warnings. Test 2 of 2: Disassemble and reassemble SSDT PASSED: Test 2, SSDT (0) reassembly, Found 0 errors, 0 warnings. FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 60 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00057| { 00058| Store (CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00059| GCAP (Local0) 00060| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00061| } 00062| 00063| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 174 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00171| { 00172| Store (\_PR.CPU0.CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00173| GCAP (Local0) 00174| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00175| } 00176| 00177| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 244 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00241| { 00242| Store (\_PR.CPU0.CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00243| GCAP (Local0) 00244| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00245| } 00246| 00247| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== FAILED [HIGH] AMLAssemblerError1104: Test 2, Assembler error in line 290 Line | AML source ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00287| { 00288| Store (\_PR.CPU0.CPDC (Arg0), Local0) 00289| GCAP (Local0) 00290| Return (Local0) | ^ | warning level 0 1104: Reserved method should not return a value (_PDC) 00291| } 00292| 00293| Method (_OSC, 4, NotSerialized) ==================================================================================================== Table SSDT (1) reassembly: Found 0 errors, 4 warnings. PASSED: Test 2, SSDT (2) reassembly, Found 0 errors, 0 warnings. PASSED: Test 2, SSDT (3) reassembly, Found 0 errors, 0 warnings. ==================================================================================================== 3 passed, 10 failed, 0 warnings, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only. ==================================================================================================== Critical failures: 1 method test, at 1 log line: 1449: Detected error 'Package limit' when evaluating '\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0.DD02._BCM'. High failures: 11 klog test, at 1 log line: 121: HIGH Kernel message: [ 3.512783] ACPI Error: Method parse/execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0._DOD] (Node f7425858), AE_AML_PACKAGE_LIMIT (20110623/psparse-536) syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1668: Assembler error in line 2261 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1687: Assembler error in line 2268 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1703: Assembler error in line 8885 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1716: Assembler error in line 9195 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1729: Assembler error in line 9242 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1742: Assembler error in line 18682 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1766: Assembler error in line 60 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1779: Assembler error in line 174 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1792: Assembler error in line 244 syntaxcheck test, at 1 log line: 1805: Assembler error in line 290 Medium failures: 9 mtrr test, at 1 log line: 76: Memory range 0xc0000000 to 0xdfffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Combining. mtrr test, at 1 log line: 78: Memory range 0xfee01000 to 0xffffffff (PCI Bus 0000:00) has incorrect attribute Write-Protect. msr test, at 1 log line: 165: MSR SYSENTER_ESP (0x175) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0xffffffffffffffff). msr test, at 1 log line: 173: MSR MISC_ENABLE (0x1a0) has 1 inconsistent values across 2 CPUs for (shift: 0 mask: 0x400c51889). wmi test, at 1 log line: 528: GUID 2B814318-4BE8-4707-9D84-A190A859B5D0 is unknown to the kernel, a driver may need to be implemented for this GUID. method test, at 1 log line: 1002: \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.COM1._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. method test, at 1 log line: 1011: \_SB_.PCI0.LPCB.SIO_.LPT0._DIS returned values, but was expected to return nothing. method test, at 1 log line: 1443: Method _BCL should return a package of more than 2 integers, got just 2. acpitables test, at 1 log line: 1643: FADT 32 bit FIRMWARE_CONTROL is non-zero, and X_FIRMWARE_CONTROL is also non-zero. Se

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >