Re: maximum number of sockets

2000-09-19 Thread Dan Kegel
Lee Chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > How do I increase the maximum number of socket connections I can have open > in the 2.4 series kernel? See http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html#limits.filehandles - Dan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a me

bug report

2000-09-19 Thread frank
hi all, I hope it is the right mailing list! Kernel version 2.2.5-15 and 2.2.10 (no other available) The problem: A consol-terminal connected to /dev/ttyS? cannot work with parity = odd. error is in: /usr/src/linux/drivers/serial.c error resolving: In fuction : __initfunc(static int seri

Re: [PATCH] Fix queued SIGIO

2000-09-19 Thread Julian Anastasov
Hello, On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Robert H. de Vries wrote: > It would be better to change SI_SIGIO in all the > include/asm-*/siginfo.h files from -5 to __SI_CODE(__SI_SIGIO, -5) > __SI_SIGIO would become (6 << 16). This is not needed for SI_SIGIO. It is not generated from the kerne

Re: __ucmpdi2

2000-09-19 Thread Jeremy Higdon
On Sep 19, 8:39am, Richard Henderson wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 12:22:41PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > IMHO it's a bug in gcc that it does not inline the comparison inside the > > switch expression, since it already does it in all other places. Perhaps > > some problem with the pat

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David Ford
Tom Rini wrote: > I wasn't arguing that (really) it's just that it really should have gone in > sooner. It's all really a moot point I understand, but still. major I understand your gripe but it couldn't be helped as it was. If more people stepped forward who really understood the mechanics a

Re: [PATCH] Fix queued SIGIO

2000-09-19 Thread Julian Anastasov
Hello, On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Chuck Lever wrote: > also, the test at issue here (from line 363 of kernel/signal.c): > > /* If this was sent by a rt mechanism, try again. */ > if (info->si_code != SI_USER) { > ret = -

Re: __ucmpdi2

2000-09-19 Thread Jeremy Higdon
> - Linux developers often do horribly stupid things, and use 64-bit >division etc instead of using a simple shift. Again, not linking >against libgcc finds those things early rather than late, because the >horribly stupid things end up requireing libgcc support. I would have thought

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Tom Rini
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:36:30PM -0700, David Ford wrote: > Tom Rini wrote: > > > >that. I see that 2.4 is getting all kinds of changes merged in > > >that should be going on with 2.5. The recent VM changes have left > > >us with deadlocks that we didn't have before. Shouldn't th

Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.4: Fix Cardbus

2000-09-19 Thread Richard Gooch
Jeff Garzik writes: > Ok, it's time to get test9 running on my laptop, so I played the "what > code didn't get cut-n-pasted" game. > > With the attached tested patch against 2.4.0-test9-pre4, CardBus is > working again for me. This patch makes the logic match that of the > old code. What patch?

PATCH 2.4.0.9.4: Fix Cardbus

2000-09-19 Thread Jeff Garzik
Ok, it's time to get test9 running on my laptop, so I played the "what code didn't get cut-n-pasted" game. With the attached tested patch against 2.4.0-test9-pre4, CardBus is working again for me. This patch makes the logic match that of the old code. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this lis

Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.4: Fix Cardbus

2000-09-19 Thread Jeff Garzik
Jeff Garzik wrote: > With the attached tested patch against 2.4.0-test9-pre4, CardBus is > working again for me. This patch makes the logic match that of the old > code. -ENOSLEEP. Here is the patch. Index: drivers/pci/pci.c === R

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2 (version numbering)

2000-09-19 Thread Tom Rini
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:26:44PM -0700, Barry K. Nathan wrote: > > to see 2.3.1xx like we did with 2.1. But the 2.2.0-testX patches seemed like > > small stuff (maybe my memory just sucks tho). > > I don't think there ever were any 2.2.0-testX patches - my recollection is > that we went from 2

Re: [PATCH] Re: SCSI scanning

2000-09-19 Thread Jeremy Higdon
On Sep 19, 10:35am, Eric Youngdale wrote: > > OK, my guess is that we may need to do some tweaking to the Makefile. > The basic idea is that you need to probe for hosts in a specific order. > The reason for this is that some host adapters emulate other types of > hardware. For example, some

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David Ford
Tom Rini wrote: > >that. I see that 2.4 is getting all kinds of changes merged in > >that should be going on with 2.5. The recent VM changes have left > >us with deadlocks that we didn't have before. Shouldn't that have > >gone into 2.5 not 2.4? > Well, I think the bitterness c

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2 (version numbering)

2000-09-19 Thread Barry K. Nathan
> to see 2.3.1xx like we did with 2.1. But the 2.2.0-testX patches seemed like > small stuff (maybe my memory just sucks tho). I don't think there ever were any 2.2.0-testX patches - my recollection is that we went from 2.1.1xx to 2.2.0-preX, with no -testX in between like we seem to be having n

Re: Alpha/Linux FP denormal processing

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:23:42 -0700 From: Richard Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Rather than fix the old udiv128 function, which was trying to do 128/128 bit division, I've pulled in a subroutine from libgcc that does 128/64 bit division, which is all we need here. So i

Re: networking todo, was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Wed, 20 Sep 2000 04:38:24 +0200 From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> We must be talking about different things. It of course detects it on ACK input, but only for data it did send itself. Every TCP detects reordering automatically on the input with the sequence numb

Bug and patch for md driver in 2.2.x. Could somebody please review?

2000-09-19 Thread Rick Bressler
Problem: The md driver doesn't handle large physical blocks in 2.2.x Pardon the long introduction, but it might be interesting to the non IBM types. I'm doing some work with Linux/S390 and need to access about 100GB of disk. The 3390 drives I can use are about 2.3GB each and that comes out t

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Olivier Galibert
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 04:11:30PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > Unfortunately, gcc does not make inline functions as cheap as "macros > with type checking". There are extra costs and often the register > allocator cannot cope and stuff starts getting spilled to the stack. It is supposedly on

Re: [User-mode-linux-user] Ptrace broken since 2.4.0-test8pre4?...

2000-09-19 Thread Jeff Dike
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > I tested vanilla test7 with ptrace() patch. It breaks uml exactly > like I see with any kernel > test7. > exec_user.c:29 ptrace(PTRACE_SYSCALL, 4901, 0, 0) = 0 > And voila, we got SIGSEGV instead of happy running child: > Child 4901 exited with signal 11 Yuri, I apol

inode_max in 2.4

2000-09-19 Thread Lee Chin
Hello, I searched Documents and couldn't find what /proc/sys/fs/inode_max has been changed to... because after 800 simultaneous open socket connections I get a "Too many open files" EMFILE error Thanks, lee __ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Tom Rini
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 05:14:39PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 18:07:20 -0600 >From: Cort Dougan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Do you really think that's forcing people to concentrate of fixing >bugs? Tell me if you disagree, I'd like to understand how you see

maximum number of sockets

2000-09-19 Thread Lee Chin
Hello, How do I increase the maximum number of socket connections I can have open in the 2.4 series kernel? Please let me know which list to post these types of questions to. Thanks, Lee __ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.ma

Re: networking todo, was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:54:30PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:51:37 +0200 >From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Receiver side SMP reordering is still there, but I'm not sure if it is >>fixable (but it'll surely hit people that cannot use

Re: Alpha/Linux FP denormal processing

2000-09-19 Thread Richard Henderson
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:52:15AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > > Instead of *= 0.5, try /= 2.0 > > Yes indeed you've found a bug in the kernel's FP emulation. > I'll see about fixing it. Rather than fix the old udiv128 function, which was trying to do 128/128 bit division, I've pulled in a

Re: networking todo, was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:51:37 +0200 From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Receiver side SMP reordering is still there, but I'm not sure if it is >fixable (but it'll surely hit people that cannot use Linux senders, I >just see the reports) > > Reordering is

Re: [PATCH/RFC] (long) network interface changes

2000-09-19 Thread jamal
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Henner Eisen wrote: [some suggestions for the next re-incarnation of the doc deleted] > > jamal> I have experimented with two schemes: one which samples the > jamal> queue via a timer and one which does it per-packet and > jamal> found that the per-packet sa

[BUG] network problems in 2.4 series

2000-09-19 Thread Lee Chin
Hello, I have a program that makes HTTP requests in a loop to a box runing Linux. It goes through another Linux box, which is using proxy ARP and is connected to the client and the web server using a cross over cable [CLIENT][PROXY][WEBSERVER] When the proxy machine uses 2.2 series kern

Re: NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU1 (stext_lock)(2.4.0-test9-pre2)

2000-09-19 Thread Jeff V. Merkey
Dave, I did a rpm -rebuild egcs rpm -rebuild glibc ldconfig ldconfig and it went away. I reinstalled a clean Open Linux 2.4 and just did ldconfig ldconfig without rebuilding and it went also went away, so I don't think rebuilding had much to do with it. I did spend any time looking further

Re: NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU1 (stext_lock)(2.4.0-test9-pre2)

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:44:30 -0600 From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> It does not seem to be saving any memory space doing it this way, since I've noticed tons of these little segments all over the place. None of them can be eliminated because each one branches b

Re: networking todo, was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 06:13:38PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:14:10 +0200 >From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >The ipid handling is still fishy, it will break when you talk to >more destinations than the inetpeer cache can take (I fixed it in >

Re: Question: Using floating point in the kernel

2000-09-19 Thread Lyle Coder
Hello, You cannot use MMX registers in the kernel either, since the kernel doesen't save and restore FX state (fxsave, fxrstor) either (just like (fsave/frstor). Best Wishes, Lyle ** Reply to message from "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:58:34 -0400 (EDT) >Tel

Re: NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU1 (stext_lock)(2.4.0-test9-pre2)

2000-09-19 Thread Jeff V. Merkey
Keith, I've seen a some problems with the way Linus (or whoever) did this. I had a bug I worked on for 5 weeks related to the buggy 2.7 gcc linker on Caldera Linux 2.4 that would for whatever reason fail to fixup all the .test.lock code sections in a file (probably because there were so many of

Re: Oops with K6-2 350, but not with other CPUs.

2000-09-19 Thread Daniel Grimwood
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Horst von Brand wrote: > Random crashes is usually a hardware problem: Bad RAM, overheated CPU, > overclocking, ... Yeah it probably is a dud CPU, but I'm just trying to be optimistic. :) I've tried two other CPUs and they work fine, so it's definitely the CPU that's the p

Re: NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU1 (stext_lock)(2.4.0-test9-pre2)

2000-09-19 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:53:19 +0200, Jorge Nerin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >All the traces end up in stext_lock, so I think it' the same bug >>>EIP; c01df3aa<= >Trace; c015db32 >Trace; c015dd03 >Trace; c0136149 >Trace; c01363fd >Trace; c01079bb >Code; c01df3aa > <_EIP>: >Co

remap_page_range, frame buffer, MIPS - mmap problem

2000-09-19 Thread Mark Lehrer
Hello. I am trying to mmap a frame buffer device (which I wrote) and it doesn't seem to work. I verified the address - it appears OK. However, whatever I write out to the address from my userland program, the bits appear to go into the bit bucket. I am trying to figure out remap_page_range; wh

Re: networking todo, was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:14:10 +0200 From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The ipid handling is still fishy, it will break when you talk to more destinations than the inetpeer cache can take (I fixed it in my local tree with the appended patch) I don't like this change, please

networking todo, was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 05:14:39PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > And hey, guess what, as a result of this right now my "non-driver > caused" core/ipv4/ipv6 networking bug list is pretty much empty right > now. Only a few netfilter glitches appear to remain. Some items for your list: The ipid

Re: Oops with K6-2 350, but not with other CPUs.

2000-09-19 Thread Daniel Grimwood
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Matthias Andree wrote: > Do you have the chance to borrow another of those K6-2s, possibly faster > ones (if your board supports those)? Is the case in a proper state (has > never been dropped, all perpendicular and so on)? A K6-2 500 has become available for me to try, won

Re: get_tty_baud_rate() on sparc64

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:59:53 +0200 From: Florian Lohoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> while porting a serial multiport driver to sparc64 i disovered that the function get_tty_baud_rate() only returns 50 or 75 Baud for 57600 and 115200 which is *aehm* not what i expected. Is thi

Re: Freezes with test9-pre4 + mmap002

2000-09-19 Thread Roger Larsson
"Juan J. Quintela" wrote: > > Hi > while I am running mmap002 in test9-pre4 I got the computer > frozen, it don't answer to my open windows anymore, it answers > only to pings. I have got the attached traces. The machine > is SMP with IDE disks. I run from comma

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 18:07:20 -0600 From: Cort Dougan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Do you really think that's forcing people to concentrate of fixing bugs? Tell me if you disagree, I'd like to understand how you see that. I see that 2.4 is getting all kinds of changes merged in that

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:58:32AM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote: > Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:22:50AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Better would be to use statement blocks like > > > #define bla(x) ({ __u32 tmp__ = (x); ; tmp__; }) > > > > Agreed. > > Not agr

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:55:58AM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote: > The GCC manual doesn't lie on that ANY LONGER with respect to EGCS. > And we should adpat for the modern versions of the compiler instead > of dragging the *ugly* code with us until the earth stops spinning, iff > the only concern i

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Cort Dougan
}Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:49:00 -0600 }From: Cort Dougan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> } }If anyone else wants access to the 2.5 tree we have as a place to }keep experimental changes I'm happy to open it up to the outside. } } Well, let's first step back for a second and really think

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:58:32AM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote: > Not agreed. In this case older version of GCC will have > almost exactly the same provlems as with functions. I guess the object was to remove the mistake-prone side effects anyway... Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send t

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:58:32 +0200 From: Martin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Agreed. Not agreed. In this case older version of GCC will have almost exactly the same provlems as with functions. Care to show an example? I do not believe this is true.

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Martin Dalecki
Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:22:50AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Better would be to use statement blocks like > > #define bla(x) ({ __u32 tmp__ = (x); ; tmp__; }) > > Agreed. Not agreed. In this case older version of GCC will have almost exactly the same provlems

Re: (reiserfs) Re: An elevator algorithm (patch)

2000-09-19 Thread Jens Axboe
On Tue, Sep 19 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > 7[3] 8[2] 9[1] 10[0] 3[3] 4[2] 5[1] 6[0] 1[3] 2[2] > p > With point `p' I mean the request after last barrier in the queue. Ah, I suspected we were talking past each other. > Then when we try to insert 99 i

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Alexander Viro
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, David S. Miller wrote: > > > > Would you mind taking a look at the difference in code output when > > register pressure in a given function is moderate to high? :-) > > Immaterial. > > If somebody cares about performanc

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Martin Dalecki
Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > > Nice spotting, but bad fix, IMO. swab...() stuff is a perfect example of > > the dangerous use of macros. BTW, 2.4 has the same problem. > > inlines usually generate worse code than macros (the gcc manual l

Re: PATCH 2.4.0.9.2: export ethtool interface

2000-09-19 Thread Donald Becker
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Andrew Morton wrote: > > This patch, against 2.4.0-test9-pre2, moves ethtool.h from the private > > domain of the sparc ports into include/linux. This publishes an ... > This is good. It would be useful to have this in place ASAP so driver > authors have something to look at

Freezes with test9-pre4 + mmap002

2000-09-19 Thread Juan J. Quintela
Hi while I am running mmap002 in test9-pre4 I got the computer frozen, it don't answer to my open windows anymore, it answers only to pings. I have got the attached traces. The machine is SMP with IDE disks. I had no additional/local patches applied.

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:49:00 -0600 From: Cort Dougan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> If anyone else wants access to the 2.5 tree we have as a place to keep experimental changes I'm happy to open it up to the outside. Well, let's first step back for a second and really think about what

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Alexander Viro
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > > +static inline __u16 ___swab16(__u16 x) > > +{ > > + return ((x & (__u16)0x00ffU) << 8) | ((x & (__u16)0xff00U) >> 8); > > +} > > +static inline __u32 ___swab16(__u32 x) >

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Alexander Viro
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > > Nice spotting, but bad fix, IMO. swab...() stuff is a perfect example of > > the dangerous use of macros. BTW, 2.4 has the same problem. > > inlines usually generate worse code than mac

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 01:22:50AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Better would be to use statement blocks like > #define bla(x) ({ __u32 tmp__ = (x); ; tmp__; }) Agreed. Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > +static inline __u16 ___swab16(__u16 x) > +{ > + return ((x & (__u16)0x00ffU) << 8) | ((x & (__u16)0xff00U) >> 8); > +} > +static inline __u32 ___swab16(__u32 x) ^ > +{ > + return ((x & (__u32

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Cort Dougan
} Cort Dougan writes: } > I've had to create a 2.5 for the PPC tree so we aren't stuck with either no } > experimentation or experimentation in the stable trees. } } Well, you're not alone. There's a lot going on in the ARM side of Linux } which looks very promising; yes it is true that ARM is n

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, David S. Miller wrote: > > Would you mind taking a look at the difference in code output when > register pressure in a given function is moderate to high? :-) Immaterial. If somebody cares about performance, they'd just better create the proper architecture-specific macr

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:13:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nice spotting, but bad fix, IMO. swab...() stuff is a perfect example of the dangerous use of macros. BTW, 2.4 has the same problem. Would you mind taking a look at the difference in code o

Re: [PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > Nice spotting, but bad fix, IMO. swab...() stuff is a perfect example of > the dangerous use of macros. BTW, 2.4 has the same problem. inlines usually generate worse code than macros (the gcc manual lies on that), e.g. the register

[PATCH] abuse of macros in swab.h

2000-09-19 Thread Alexander Viro
23:43 2000 +++ include/linux/byteorder/swab.h.new Tue Sep 19 22:29:07 2000 @@ -13,31 +13,35 @@ * See asm-i386/byteorder.h and suches for examples of how to provide * architecture-dependent optimized versions * + * They shouldn't be macros, damnit. AV, 2919 + * */ /* casts are nece

Re: [PATCH] Fix big endian ext2 bmap in 2.2.

2000-09-19 Thread Alexander Viro
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Andi Kleen wrote: > > This patch fixes an obvious bug introduced with the ext2 changes in 2.2.18pre > (look up the definition of le32_to_cpu on BE machines without a special > assembler version for it and on machines that have it) > > Patch against 2.2.18pre9 Wrong fix.

Re: [PATCH] Fix big endian ext2 bmap in 2.2.

2000-09-19 Thread David S. Miller
Date:Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:50:06 +0200 From: "Andi Kleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This patch fixes an obvious bug introduced with the ext2 changes in 2.2.18pre (look up the definition of le32_to_cpu on BE machines without a special assembler version for it and on machines that

Re: [PATCH] Re: SCSI scanning

2000-09-19 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Torben Mathiasen wrote: > > I can't seem to find a clean way of getting the drivers outside "drivers/scsi" > to link _after_ the other low-level drivers. My linux Makefile abilities is > limited though, so if someone with the knowledge would do what Eric requests > above pl

[PATCH] Fix big endian ext2 bmap in 2.2.

2000-09-19 Thread Andi Kleen
This patch fixes an obvious bug introduced with the ext2 changes in 2.2.18pre (look up the definition of le32_to_cpu on BE machines without a special assembler version for it and on machines that have it) Patch against 2.2.18pre9 -Andi --- linux-work/fs/ext2/inode.c-EXT2 Fri Sep 15 02:06:

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Russell King
Cort Dougan writes: > I've had to create a 2.5 for the PPC tree so we aren't stuck with either no > experimentation or experimentation in the stable trees. Well, you're not alone. There's a lot going on in the ARM side of Linux which looks very promising; yes it is true that ARM is not the faste

Re: [PATCH] Re: SCSI scanning

2000-09-19 Thread Torben Mathiasen
On Tue, Sep 19 2000, Eric Youngdale wrote: > 1) SCSI core. > 2) low-level drivers (in same order as specified in hosts.c). > 3) upper level drivers. > Okay, I've just spent a couple of hours browsing through the scsi code, compiling different configs, and trying to figure out wha

Re: [RFC] Wine speedup through kernel module

2000-09-19 Thread Daniel Pittman
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] >> Anyway, why did you see the need for the registry stubs in this case, >> if I may ask? > > Firstly, in wine the registry is handled by the wineserver process. > This means it can

Re: Q: sock output serialization

2000-09-19 Thread Henner Eisen
> "jamal" == jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: jamal> Packets in flight? >> In the extreme case, there could still arrive up to the window >> size frames. jamal> Assuming this depends on path latency and not some bad jamal> programming Yes. Although the latter could al

Re: [PATCH/RFC] (long) network interface changes

2000-09-19 Thread Henner Eisen
> "jamal" == jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Nice introduction! jamal> The driver uses the feedback information to intelligently jamal> adjust its sending rate. (i.e reduce or increase calls to jamal> netif_rx() or send a congestion-experienced frame to its jamal>

Re: Bugreport kernel 2.4.0-test8

2000-09-19 Thread Steven Cole
On 2000-09-19 8:33:49 Michael Zieger wrote: >I just found a big bug in kernel 2.4.0-test8 that leads to a major >crash because PID 4 [kupdate] dies. >I could reproduce the problem by doing this: >- Open StarOffice under KDE >- Create new textfile >- Try to save it under a via NFS mounted directo

Re: Oops with K6-2 350, but not with other CPUs.

2000-09-19 Thread Horst von Brand
Daniel Grimwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > am having many random fatal oopses with my K6-2 350. Can't find > anything related on the mailing list archive, so here it is. Also, I'm > not subscribed to the mailing list but do read it via NNTP, a CC: would > be much appreciated :). TIA. Random

Re: Rik's VM contains a deadlock somewhere

2000-09-19 Thread Roger Larsson
Hi, I too tested to stress the new VM Quintelas mmap002 "deadlocks" for me. PPro, 96 MB, UP active: 22337 (I think this varies, have too lock a 2nd time) inactive_dirty: 324 varies inactive_clean: 0 free: 288 ... 1x 512 = 512 kB ... 2 x 16 + 1 x 32 + 1 x 64 = 640 kB My feeling when looking at

Re: An elevator algorithm

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 11:09:47PM +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote: > So that leaves two choices: > > 1. Perfect elevator (CSCAN) without the O(1) optimization. (My second >patch.) We can try with 1. first. Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the

Re: An elevator algorithm

2000-09-19 Thread Peter Osterlund
Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > modification Peter suggested there can be more and we should track the one > > more on the back of the queue. I don't think it's worthwhile. > > Agree, I don't think the added complexity would be worth it. So that leaves two choices: 1. Perfect elevat

Re: (reiserfs) Re: An elevator algorithm (patch)

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 10:38:52PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > I haven't had a chance to really look at Peter's mods yet, but surely > the current elevator can have many entries with 0 sequence. As an > example, say the start sequence is 3 and we received request sector > 10...1 in descending order

Re: 2.4.0-test9-pre2: pcmcia 3c59x doesn't work

2000-09-19 Thread Dag B
Linus Torvalds wrote: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dag Bakke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Tigran Aivazian wrote: >> >> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Derek Wildstar wrote: >> >> > On 18 Sep 2000, Alex Romosan wrote: >> > >> > I get the same thing with a Xircon realport 10/100/modem card. Works >> > gre

Re: weird PCI problems...

2000-09-19 Thread Tigran Aivazian
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Martin Mares wrote: > Anyway, can you send me your /proc/ioports and /proc/iomem, please? Yes, sure: -0009fbff : System RAM 0009fc00-0009 : reserved 000a-000b : Video RAM area 000c-000c7fff : Video ROM 000d-000d0fff : Extension ROM 000d4000-000d47

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread Cort Dougan
} On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:53:41PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: } > } > } > >> Linus, } > > } > >> Where do architecture maintainers stand when they don't submit their } > >> problems to linux-kernel or the great Ted Bug List(tm)? } > > } > >Up against the wall so we can shoot them? } > >

APIC errors on my dual celeron, 2.4.0-test7

2000-09-19 Thread Seth R Arnold
Greetings everyone. I have been running Linux kernel 2.4.0-test7 for some time now on my dual celeron (BP6) system. I have an AGP video card, one ethernet card, one IDE sound card, ps/2 keyboard and mouse, and two IDE hard drives. (No floppy, no CD.) I get errors of this sort on a regular basis

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread David Weinehall
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:53:41PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> Linus, > > > >> Where do architecture maintainers stand when they don't submit their > >> problems to linux-kernel or the great Ted Bug List(tm)? > > > >Up against the wall so we can shoot them? > > > >:) > > So I am o

Re: (reiserfs) Re: An elevator algorithm (patch)

2000-09-19 Thread Jens Axboe
On Tue, Sep 19 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > I don't see any reason why there can't be multiple p points in the current > > elevator. > > Without the proposed modification after the last barrier in the queue all the > requests should be in order. I haven't had a chance to really look at Pete

Re: GCC proposal for "@" asm constraint

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 04:16:07PM -0400, John Wehle wrote: > Umm ... "miscompilation"? As in the compiler produced the wrong code > based on the input provided? That's not a gcc bug (gcc is doing the right thing). It's the kernel that should use the "memory" clobber in the spinlock implementati

Retract - [PATCH] scsi_ioctl_send_command() shouldn't write SEND DIAGNOSTIC S reserved bits

2000-09-19 Thread Matt_Domsch
Indeed, my copy of the SCSI 3 SPC-1 (ftp://ftp.t10.org/t10/drafts/spc/spc-r11a.pdf dated 21-Mar-1997) and SPC-2 (ftp://ftp.t10.org/t10/drafts/spc2/spc2r18.pdf dated 21-May-2000) show them differently. SPC-3 isn't available for download.Anyone have the "final" copy (if indeed it's not still in

Re: 2.4.0-test9-pre2: pcmcia 3c59x doesn't work

2000-09-19 Thread Tigran Aivazian
Hi Linus, On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Do the above two fixes help? If not, I suspect that we're better off > just reverting the new PCI bus allocation until it's fixed. No, unfortunately they don't help at all, neither individually nor in pair. So far, the only working case was

inlines [was Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2]

2000-09-19 Thread suckfish
Linus Torvalds writes: > > >On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Rogier Wolff wrote: >> >> If gcc starts shouting: >> >> somefile.c:1234: declared inline function 'serial_paranoia_check' is >> somefile.c:1234: larger than 1k. Declining to honor the inline directive. > >That's not what gcc does. > >Gcc silentl

Re: generic scsi gone in 2.4.0test9pre4

2000-09-19 Thread Marko Kreen
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 12:48:14PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Marko Kreen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:32:09AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > Tried burning a cd with pre4 and devfs. There is no /dev/sg0 and /dev/scsi > > > is empty. > > It 'moved'. Do a

Re: GCC proposal for "@" asm constraint

2000-09-19 Thread John Wehle
> I see. So Jamie was right and we reproduced a case of miscompilation. Umm ... "miscompilation"? As in the compiler produced the wrong code based on the input provided? int * p; ... a = *p; movl p,%eax movl (%eax),%edx The assembly code appears to load the address sto

Re: weird PCI problems...

2000-09-19 Thread Martin Mares
Hi Tigran! Sorry for the delay, I'm now finishing up for my final exams, so I get to answering my mail once per day if I'm lucky. > Yes, doing it like this works: > > --- linux/drivers/pci/pci.c Mon Sep 18 12:35:11 2000 > +++ work/drivers/pci/pci.cMon Sep 18 13:12:20 2000 > @@ -714,7 +714

[OOPS] 2.2.18pre9 Oops on rmmod of mousedev.c

2000-09-19 Thread Floris Kraak
( This has been resend, [EMAIL PROTECTED] already got a copy as well as the usb-uhci maintainer as listed in MAINTAINERS ) DISCLAIMER: This oops may very well be categorized in the 'user shoots himself' department but I still thought it interesting enough to post a bugreport and see if anythin

Re: [User-mode-linux-user] Ptrace broken since 2.4.0-test8pre4?...

2000-09-19 Thread Yuri Pudgorodsky
Hello Jeff, I tested vanilla test7 with ptrace() patch. It breaks uml exactly like I see with any kernel > test7. Seems like the ORIG_EAX != -1 is needed to correctly restart syscall after PTRACE_SYSCALL, but I did not check this codepath thoroughly. Following what is going with uml, just for

Posible bug in dmascc

2000-09-19 Thread Metod S56WMN
Hello,all I use kernel 2.4.0-test8. When i load the dmascc module my monitor turn off(power save mode). It works well in 2.2.17. Any idea? Regards, Metod [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pl

Re: (reiserfs) Re: An elevator algorithm (patch)

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:41:17PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > I don't see any reason why there can't be multiple p points in the current > elevator. Without the proposed modification after the last barrier in the queue all the requests should be in order. Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list:

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9-pre2

2000-09-19 Thread schwidefsky
>> Linus, > >> Where do architecture maintainers stand when they don't submit their >> problems to linux-kernel or the great Ted Bug List(tm)? > >Up against the wall so we can shoot them? > >:) So I am one of the guys who will be shot ... I wanted to do an update for the s/390 architecture sin

Re: generic scsi gone in 2.4.0test9pre4

2000-09-19 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Marko Kreen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:32:09AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > Tried burning a cd with pre4 and devfs. There is no /dev/sg0 and /dev/scsi > > is empty. > It 'moved'. Do a 'cd /dev/scsi; ln ../host0' for temporary workaround. > > Well, I 'tried t

Re: (reiserfs) Re: An elevator algorithm (patch)

2000-09-19 Thread Jens Axboe
On Tue, Sep 19 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > But there may be several p points in the queue, how are you going > > to keep track of all of them? > > With the current elevator there should be only 1 p point, but with the I don't see any reason why there can't be multiple p points in the curre

Re: (reiserfs) Re: An elevator algorithm (patch)

2000-09-19 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 09:17:51PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > But there may be several p points in the queue, how are you going > to keep track of all of them? With the current elevator there should be only 1 p point, but with the modification Peter suggested there can be more and we should track

Re: SCSI scanning changes break RAID autorun

2000-09-19 Thread Michael Shields
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ Btw, has autorun ever worked with non-scsi devices? Yes, with IDE disks at least. -- Shields. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Plea

  1   2   3   >