data-dismiss="modal">
                                                        <la:message key="labels.crud_button_cancel"/>
                                                    </button>
                                                    <button type="submit" class="btn btn-outline-light"

    if (supportsRemove) {
      // We use a copy of "entryToRemove" in the assertion because "entryToRemove" might be
      // invalidated and have undefined behavior after entrySet.removeAll(entriesToRemove),
      // for example entryToRemove.getValue() might be null.
      Entry<K, V> entryToRemoveCopy = mapEntry(entryToRemove.getKey(), entryToRemove.getValue());

      int initialSize = map.size();

     * setException() will be a no-op because the Future is already done.
     *
     * Both scenarios are bad: The output Future might never complete, or, if it does complete, it
     * might not run some of its listeners. The likely result is that the app will hang. (And of
     * course stack overflows are bad news in general. For example, we may have overflowed in the

	// strongly recommend that you make no assumptions about the maximum size. As
	// of this writing, the typical size is less than 4096 bytes, but that can vary.
	// Also, future updates to AWS might require larger sizes.
	Credentials auth.Credentials `xml:",omitempty"`

	// A percentage value that indicates the size of the policy in packed form.
	// The service rejects any policy with a packed size greater than 100 percent,

            "one", 1,
            "two", 2,
            "three", 3,
            "four", 4,
            "five", 5,
            "six", 6,
            "seven", 7,
            "eight", 8),
        "eight",
        8,
        "five",
        5,
        "four",
        4,
        "one",
        1,
        "seven",
        7,
        "six",
        6,
        "three",

  which the scheduler might miss some updates for the Pods rejected by NodeUnschedulable plugin and put the Pods in the queue for a longer time than needed. ([#127427](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/127427), [@sanposhiho](https://github.com/sanposhiho)) [SIG Scheduling]
- Fixes the bug in PodTopologySpread that only happens with QHint enabled, 

            if (testTransport == null) {
                // No recovery possible, remove synchronously
                removeChannel(failedChannel);
                return;
            }
            // Recovery might be viable, attempt it with pre-created transport
            if (state.shouldRetry()) {
                scheduleRecoveryWithTransport(failedChannel, state, testTransport);
            } else {

						<button type="submit" name="search" id="searchButton"
							class="btn btn-primary">
							<em class="fa fa-search">
						</button>
						<button type="button" class="btn btn-light"
							data-bs-toggle="collapse" data-bs-target="#searchOptions"
							id="searchOptionsButton">
							<em class="fa fa-cog"> <span class="visually-hidden"><la:message
									key="labels.header_form_option_btn" /></span>

						<button type="submit" name="search" id="searchButton"
							class="btn btn-primary">
							<em class="fa fa-search">
						</button>
						<button type="button" class="btn btn-light"
							data-bs-toggle="collapse" data-bs-target="#searchOptions"
							id="searchOptionsButton">
							<em class="fa fa-cog"> <span class="visually-hidden"><la:message
									key="labels.header_form_option_btn" /></span>

Physical GPUs or TPUs can also be the target of attacks. [Published
research](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=gpu+side+channel) shows that it
might be possible to use side channel attacks on the GPU to leak data from other
running models or processes in the same system. GPUs can also have
implementation bugs that might allow attackers to leave malicious code running
and leak or tamper with applications from other users. Please report