On Fri, Aug 26 2005, Yani Ioannou wrote:
> > Please make the interface accept number of seconds (as suggested by Jens)
> > and remove this module parameter. This way interface will be more flexible
> > and cleaner. I really don't see any advantage in doing "echo 1 > ..."
> > instead
> > of "echo
On Thu, Aug 25 2005, Jon Escombe wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >@@ -1661,6 +1671,9 @@
> >where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
> >rq->flags |= REQ_PREEMPT;
> >}
> >+ if (action == ide_next)
> >+ where = ELEVATOR_INSERT_FRONT;
> >+
> >__elv_a
On Friday 26 August 2005 06:43, Patrick Draper wrote:
> On 8/23/05, Denis Vlasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Since it happens less than once a day, why not just add a code
> > >to reset the NIC completely in this case, like it is
> > >typically done in tx_timeout handlers of many NICs, and fo
David,
> On Fri, 2005-08-05 at 14:49 +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> > If I change your program to do something like the above, I also
> > do not see a message from the handler -- i.e., it is not being
> > called, and I'm pretty sure it should be.
>
> Hm, yes. What happens is we come back out of
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 18:15 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 02:22 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:29 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > Devastating latency on a 3Ghz xeon .. Maybe the raw_spinlock in the
> > > timer base is creating a unbounded latency?
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 19:45 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone have x86_64 working in PREEMPT_RT ?
> >
> > builds fine, but doesnt seem to boot at the moment. Havent investigated
> > yet.
>
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wakeup race checking shouldn't trigger when interrupts are off. Here's
> a fix.
thanks, applied.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Devastating latency on a 3Ghz xeon .. Maybe the raw_spinlock in the
> timer base is creating a unbounded latency?
could you please submit a more complete bugreport? What did you do that
triggered this? Kernel config would be nice too, and a latency_
* Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, the only other solutions that I can think of is:
>
> a) add yet another (bloat) lock to the buffer head.
>
> b) Still use your b_update_lock for the jbd_lock_bh_journal_head and
> change the jbd_lock_bh_state to what I discussed earlier, and th
>I'm not subscribed, so sorry if this doesn't fall into the original
>thread. I'm curious as to why the kernel has to include the decoder -
>why you can't just run a self-extracting executable in an empty
>initramfs (with a preset capacity if needs be).
The kernel already includes gunz
Meelis Roos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> When skimming through the code I thought that reboot_thru_bios was the
>> default.
>
> My bad. I retested it and it's reboot=w was the one that works.
>
>> If you can't track this down we can at least dig up your board DMI ID
>> and put it in the list of
When skimming through the code I thought that reboot_thru_bios was the
default.
My bad. I retested it and it's reboot=w was the one that works.
If you can't track this down we can at least dig up your board DMI ID
and put it in the list of systems that need to go through the BIOS to reboot.
Hi Bartlomiej,
Thank you for your feedback :), as this is my first dabble in
ide/block drivers I certainly need it!
On 8/25/05, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +config IDEDISK_FREEZE
>
> Is there any advantage of having it as a config option?
The main reasons I added the
On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 14:58 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> FYI, in -53-05 i've added a bh->b_update_lock, which enabled me to get
> rid of the bitlock ugliness in fs/buffer.c. Maybe it could be used to
> have a better fix for the jbd bitlock thing too?
Well, I just spent several hours trying to use
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > Skipping MAP_SHARED in fork() sounds like a good idea to me...
> >
>
> Indeed. Linus, can you remember why we haven't done this before?
Hmm. Historical reasons. Also, if the child ends up needing it, it will
now have to fault them in.
That said,
This is the second of two patches, it implements the setprlimit()
syscall.
Implementation: This patch provides a new syscall setprlimit() for
writing a given process resource limits for i386. Its implementation
follows closely the setrlimit syscall. It is given a pid as an
additional argument. If
Hi all!
First I would like to thank everyone who commented on my code.
I understand that this won't go into mainline but nevertheless I would
like to work on it further as it is a great learning experience to me.
I incorporated the changes suggested to me by this list (at least I hope
so), any c
--- Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Danial Thom wrote:
> >
> > --- Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Danial Thom wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I think the concensus is that 2.6 has made
> >>
> >>trade
> >>
> >>>offs that lower raw throughput, which is
> what
> >>
> >>a
> >>
The recent change to locks_remove_flock code in fs/locks.c changes how
byte range locks are removed from closing files, which shows up a bug in
cifs. The assumption in the cifs code was that the close call sent to
the server would remove any pending locks on the server on this file,
but that
John W. Linville wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:52:44PM -0300, Márcio Oliveira wrote:
The command rdev can change the default root partition on x86 linux
systems with pre-built kernels.
Of course...I meant I don't know of anything like that for PPC.
About the CONFIG_CMDLINE
Who is the memory mapping expert? :)
What are the current file size limits for memory mapping via glibc's
mmap() function on linux:
- for a native 32-Bit System not using LFS?
- for a native 32-Bit System using LFS?
- for a native 64-Bit System?
(linux-kernel >2.6, of course)
It would be nice i
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:09 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> A word of caution (aka. disclaimer). This is still new. I still expect
> there are some cases in the code that was missed and can cause a dead
> lock or other bad side effect. Hopefully, we can iron these all out.
> Also, I noticed that
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 21:59 +0800, Yingchao Zhou wrote:
> In stop_machine function, there are codes:
> if (ret < 0) {
> stopmachine_set_state(STOPMACHINE_EXIT);
> up(&stopmachine_mutex);
> return ret;
> }
> And in __stop_machine_run ,there are:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Skipping MAP_SHARED in fork() sounds like a good idea to me...
>
> Indeed. Linus, can you remember why we haven't done this before?
Where "this" looks something like the patch below, shamelessly
merging Nick's and Andy's patches and adding the initiali
This is in reference to Chris Wedgwood's patch.
Wouldn't it be better to put overmount_rootfs in initramfs.c
and call it only if there's a initramfs?
printk(KERN_INFO "checking if image is initramfs...");
err = unpack_to_rootfs((char *)initrd_start,
Paul Jackson wrote:
At the suggestion of Nick Piggin and Dinakar, totally disable
the facility to allow cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic
sched domains in Linux 2.6.13, in order to avoid problems
first reported by John Hawkes (corrupt sched data structures
and kernel oops).
This has been b
jerome lacoste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/23/05, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > jerome lacoste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am on a Dell Inspiron 8100 laptop with 512 M and 1G disk cache. I
> > > usually have at least 4 big applications running simultaneously
I know that anon_hash_chain has gone away in 2.6 because
the inodes for special filesystems like sockfs, pipefs,
etc are now associated with a superblock. Should these
inodes have i_hash linked into the inode hashtable then?
It appears in 2.4 now they are associated with superblocks
as well.
I hav
Rik van Riel wrote:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
fork() can be changed so as not to set up page tables for
MAP_SHARED mappings. I think that has other tradeoffs like
initially causing several unavoidable faults reading
libraries and program text.
Actually, libraries and program t
On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 02:22 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:29 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > Devastating latency on a 3Ghz xeon .. Maybe the raw_spinlock in the
> > timer base is creating a unbounded latency?
>
> The lock is only held for really short periods. The only p
Eric Dumazet wrote:
Furthermore, a lazy sync would mean to change sysctl proc_handler for
"file-nr" to perform a synchronize before calling proc_dointvec, this
would be really obscure.
I was only using your terminology (ie. the 'lazy' synch after the
atomic is updated).
Actually, a better
Hi Andrew,
I'd like to get this into 2.6.13 if possible. If it's too late, it's
not the end of the world -- we can wait for 2.6.13.1. But it's a
tiny, obvious patch that fixes a crash that at least one person
actually hit running a normal application:
http://openib.org/pipermail/openib-general/2
This patch adds the Dell Systems Management Base Driver with sysfs support.
This driver has been tested with Dell OpenManage.
Signed-off-by: Doug Warzecha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.13-rc7.orig/Documentation/dcdbas.txt
linux-2.6.13-rc7/Documentation/dcdbas.txt
--- linux-2.6.13
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:29 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> Devastating latency on a 3Ghz xeon .. Maybe the raw_spinlock in the
> timer base is creating a unbounded latency?
The lock is only held for really short periods. The only possible long
period would be migration of timers from a dead hotplug
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 09:04:37AM +0900, Tomita, Haruo wrote:
> On Thursday, August 25, 2005 8:02 PM (JST), Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > > 2.6.13- rc7-libata1.patch.bz2 was used.
> > > A combined mode of ata_piix seems not to work.
> > > Is the following patches correct?
> > >
> > > diff -urN lin
On Thursday, August 25, 2005 8:02 PM (JST), Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > 2.6.13- rc7-libata1.patch.bz2 was used.
> > A combined mode of ata_piix seems not to work.
> > Is the following patches correct?
> >
> > diff -urN linux-2.6.13-rc7.orig/drivers/scsi/Kconfig
> linux-2.6.13-rc7/drivers/scsi/Kcon
Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This patch changes fifo_poll not to return POLLERR to take care of a FIXME
> in fs/pipe.c stating that "Most unices do not set POLLERR for fifos." The
> comment has been there since 2.3.99-pre3 so either apply this patch or
> alternatively, I can send a n
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> On Sul, 2005-06-19 at 18:55, Pavel Machek wrote:
> ...
> >
> > If we are serious about utf-8 support in ext3, we should return
> > -EINVAL if someone passes non-canonical utf-8 string.
>
> That would ironically not be standards compliant
Which standards?
The standards I've r
> Already fixed in Greg's i2c tree and -mm for quite some time now...
So it is. The comment says, however, that "the existing code works
somewhat by accident." In the case of the 9240 driver, however, the
existing code demonstrably does not work - it oopsed on me. The patch
in Greg's tree looks
On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 09:18 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt writes:
>
> > Ok, so what is the problem then ? Why do we have to wait at all ? Why
> > not just unplug/replug right away ?
>
> We'd have to be absolutely certain that the driver could not possibly
> take another in
Devastating latency on a 3Ghz xeon .. Maybe the raw_spinlock in the
timer base is creating a unbounded latency?
Daniel
( softirq-timer/1-13 |#1): new 66088 us maximum-latency critical section.
=> started at timestamp 1857957769: <__down_mutex+0x5f/0x295>
=> ended at timestamp 1858023857: <_
Sorry. Here's the start of the thread.
Tony
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:08:13 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Antonino A. Daplas:
> intelfb/fbdev: Save info->flags in a local variable
> Sylvain Meyer:
> intelfb: Do not ioremap entire graphics aperture
One of these chan
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:10 -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
> That IS strange. 1024 is on a "level" boundry, but then next level is
> 2**15, not 2**11. I will take a look.
Remember that the level is never filled, so maybe the smallest level
just gets an offset or something? Well, you're the expe
Benjamin Herrenschmidt writes:
> Ok, so what is the problem then ? Why do we have to wait at all ? Why
> not just unplug/replug right away ?
We'd have to be absolutely certain that the driver could not possibly
take another interrupt or try to access the device on behalf of the
old instance of th
John McCutchan wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:54 -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
Robert Love wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 09:33 -0400, John McCutchan wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 22:07 +1200, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
~
I think the best thing is to take idr into user space and emulate the
pr
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 17:40 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > (frequency) * (1/drift) * (1/latency) * (1/(jitter_factor * cpus))
>
> (Note that 1/cpus, being a constant for all evaluations of this
> expression, has no effect on the final ranking.)
I was sloppy expressing how the jitter facto
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 03:16:49PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 08:07:55PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > IMO that's a question to rth: why do we really need to block always_inline
> > on alpha?
>
> Because I use "extern inline" in the proper way. That is, I have both
> in
Nevermind , the original patch looks fine.
Daniel
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 23:54 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > @@ -257,6 +257,7 @@ void check_preempt_wakeup(struct task_st
> > * hangs and race conditions.
> > */
> > if (!preempt_count() &
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 08:07:55PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> IMO that's a question to rth: why do we really need to block always_inline
> on alpha?
Because I use "extern inline" in the proper way. That is, I have both
inline and out-of-line versions of some routines. These routines have
their addr
spinlock used in irq handler should be initialized before registering
irq, even if we know that our device has interrupts disabled; handler
is registered shared and taking spinlock is done unconditionally. As
it is, we can and do get oopsen on boot for some configuration, depending
on irq routing
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 23:54 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > @@ -257,6 +257,7 @@ void check_preempt_wakeup(struct task_st
> > * hangs and race conditions.
> > */
> > if (!preempt_count() &&
> > + !__raw_irqs_disabled() &&
> >
This patch makes it possible to use a system call instead of
an ioctl to run spu code on spufs.
This is only provided for reference, the current patch is
unlikely to be used in future versions.
We planning to move to a model where creation/destruction
of SPU threads as well as entering the execut
Jordan Crouse wrote:
Todd - do you have a ChangeLog from Take 1? :)
Right, here's what's changed in this version...
The generic structure of an operating point as an array of integers is
dropped. A struct powerop_point is now an entirely backend-defined
struct of arbitrary fields.
There i
This patch makes it possible to receive user-defined
signals when the spufs ibox and wbox files are accessed
from an SPE, so data can be read/written from/to
them again.
Unfortunately, this kind of messes with the layering
of the high- and low-level parts of the code, so I'm
currently thinking abo
Add the source code that is used to generate spu_save_dump.h and
spu_restore_dump.h. Since a full spu tool chain is needed to
generate these files, the default remains to use the shipped
versions in order to keep the number of tools for building the
kernel down.
From: Mark Nutter: <[EMAIL PROTECTE
In order to debug spu threads, we need access to the registers
of the running SPU. Unfortunately, this is only possible when
the SPU context is saved to memory.
This patch adds operations that enable accessing an SPU
in either runnable or saved state. We use an RW semaphore
to protect the state of
Thankfully, there is now documentation available to the world about
the Cell architecture (http://cell.scei.co.jp/e_download.html), so I
am now able to disclose more of our work on the SPU file system.
This is a rather big update compared to the previous version, as it
contains work from Mark Nutt
Add some infrastructure for saving and restoring the context of an
SPE. This patch creates a new structure that can hold the whole
state of a physical SPE in memory. It also contains code that
avoids races during the context switch and the binary code that
is loaded to the SPU in order to access it
Hi Alexey,
> The adm9240 driver, in adm9240_detect(), allocates a structure. The
> error path attempts to kfree() ->client field of it (second one),
> resulting in an oops (or slab corruption) if the hardware is not
> present.
>
> ->client field in adm1026, adm1031, smsc47b397 and smsc47m1 is th
In qdio_get_micros() volatile in return type is plain noise (even with old
gccisms it would make no sense - noreturn function returning __u64 is a
bit odd ;-)
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -urN RC13-rc7-emac-iounmap/drivers/s390/cio/qdio.c
RC13-rc7-attr-misc/drivers/s390/ci
Dumb typo: iounmap(&local_pointer_variable).
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -urN RC13-rc7-m68k-adb.patch/drivers/net/ibm_emac/ibm_emac_core.c
RC13-rc7-emac-iounmap/drivers/net/ibm_emac/ibm_emac_core.c
--- RC13-rc7-m68k-adb.patch/drivers/net/ibm_emac/ibm_emac_core.c
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> @@ -257,6 +257,7 @@ void check_preempt_wakeup(struct task_st
>* hangs and race conditions.
>*/
> if (!preempt_count() &&
> + !__raw_irqs_disabled() &&
> p->prio < current->prio &&
> rt_task(
Hi!
I just switched out motherboards and CPUs From a Asus K8v SE Deluxe
to a to a Asus A8V-E Deluxe, and a 754 pin 3200+ to a 934 pin 3200+.
I am now having some fairly serious instability issues. The system
locks up completely with no oops. After disabling CONFIGHIMEM and
CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTA
Wakeup race checking shouldn't trigger when interrupts are off. Here's a
fix.
Daniel
Index: linux-2.6.12/kernel/rt.c
===
--- linux-2.6.12.orig/kernel/rt.c 2005-08-25 21:33:43.0 +
+++ linux-2.6.12/kernel/rt.c200
I'm searching my way through changesests.
rc2 was OK, rc3 was broken.
60a762b6a6dec17cc4339b60154902fd04c2f9f2 was OK too - the commit before
ACPI merge on 2005-07-12
Currently compiling 5028770a42e7bc4d15791a44c28f0ad539323807 - acpi
merge commit. Will see tomorroy whether it works.
--
Me
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 11:21 -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:49:03AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt was heard to
> remark:
> >
> > Of course, we'll possibly end up with a different ethX or whatever, but
>
> Yep, but that's not an issue, since all the various device-naming
On Wednesday, 24 of August 2005 23:21, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 August 2005 23:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm currently seeing a memory problem on a NUMA-enabled dual-Opteron 250
> > box with the 2.6.12.5 and 2.6.13-rc* (up to 7) kernels. Namely, the box
> > has 12 GB
> (frequency) * (1/drift) * (1/latency) * (1/(jitter_factor * cpus))
(Note that 1/cpus, being a constant for all evaluations of this
expression, has no effect on the final ranking.)
The usual way it's done is with some fiddle factors:
quality_a^a * quality_b^b * quality_c^c
Or, equivalently:
a
The adm9240 driver, in adm9240_detect(), allocates a structure. The
error path attempts to kfree() ->client field of it (second one),
resulting in an oops (or slab corruption) if the hardware is not present.
->client field in adm1026, adm1031, smsc47b397 and smsc47m1 is the first in
${HWMON}_data
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 19:45 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Does anyone have x86_64 working in PREEMPT_RT ?
>
> builds fine, but doesnt seem to boot at the moment. Havent investigated
> yet.
I tested an em64t , and it hung during boot .. But this pat
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 16:09 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> A word of caution (aka. disclaimer). This is still new. I still expect
> there are some cases in the code that was missed and can cause a dead
> lock or other bad side effect. Hopefully, we can iron these all out.
> Also, I noticed that
Vadim Lobanov wrote:
I figured it was something along these lines. In that case, is the
following code (from kernel/posix-timers.c) really doing the right
thing?
do
expires = timr->it_timer.expires;
while ((volatile long) (timr->it_timer.expires) != expires);
Seems it's casting the value,
Hi,
The current relayfs read implementation works fine, but was designed
to be used mainly for 'draining' the buffer after a tracing run. It
turns out that people really want to be able to read from the buffer
during a live trace, for example the blktrace application submitted
recently:
http://m
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Christopher Friesen wrote:
> Vadim Lobanov wrote:
>
> > I'm positive I'm doing something wrong here. In fact, I bet it's the
> > volatile cast within the loop that's wrong; but I'm not sure how to do
> > it correctly. Any help / pointers / discussion would be appreciated.
>
>
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> @@ -1527,7 +1533,8 @@ static int selinux_vm_enough_memory(long
> int rc, cap_sys_admin = 0;
> struct task_security_struct *tsec = current->security;
>
> - rc = secondary_ops->capable(current, CAP_SYS_ADMIN);
> + rc = secondary_o
* Chris Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Stephen Smalley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > e.g. if secondary_ops->capable is null, the SELinux tests aren't going
> > to show that, because they will still see that the SELinux permission
> > checks are working correctly. They only test failure/suc
Todd - do you have a ChangeLog from Take 1? :)
Jordan
--
Jordan Crouse
Senior Linux Engineer
AMD - Personal Connectivity Solutions Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.ke
Hi Harald,
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 06:55:50PM +0200, Harald Welte told us:
> Is it true that PeerGuardian is a proprietary application? I'm not
> going to debug this problem using a proprietary ip_queue program, sorry.
sorry to jump in here, but I took a quick look at PeerGuardian,
according to
Vadim Lobanov wrote:
I'm positive I'm doing something wrong here. In fact, I bet it's the
volatile cast within the loop that's wrong; but I'm not sure how to do
it correctly. Any help / pointers / discussion would be appreciated.
You need to cast is as dereferencing a volatile pointer.
Chris
The adm9240 driver, in adm9240_detect(), allocates a structure. The
error path attempts to kfree() a subfield of that structure, resulting
in an oops (or slab corruption) if the hardware is not present. This
one seems worth fixing for 2.6.13.
jon
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <[EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:44 -0400, Lee Revell
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:20 -0400, Michael
> Krufky wrote:
> > > Todd Bailey wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm all for this but I think there is
> little uncle George can do.
> > >
> > > Was it necess
--- Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Danial Thom wrote:
>
> > The tests I reported where on UP systems.
> Perhaps
> > the default settings are better for this in
> 2.4,
> > since that is what I used, and you used your
> > hacks for both.
>
> My modifications to the kernel are unlikely t
Hi,
The recent discussion on the list concerning memory barriers and write
ordering took a side-trip to the volatile keyword, especially its
correct / incorrect usage. Someone posted a link to the LKML archives,
in which the argument is made that it is best to keep 'volatile' _out_
of variable and
> NAK, this is wrong:
>
> > + lock_super(sb);
> > err = ext3_group_extend(sb, EXT3_SB(sb)->s_es, n_blocks_count);
> > + unlock_super(sb);
>
> This basically reverses the order of locking between lock_super() and
> journal_start() (the latter acts like a lock beca
Hello,
I have simple linux router with three fastethernet cards (intel , e100
driver). About two months ago it started hanging. It's completly
freezing machine (no ooops. First of all when it's booting few
messages like this appears on screen:
NF_IP_ASSERT: ip_conntrack_core.c:1128(ip_conntrack_a
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:44 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:20 -0400, Michael Krufky wrote:
> > Todd Bailey wrote:
> >
> > > I'm all for this but I think there is little uncle George can do.
> >
> > Was it necessary to cc this to everybody in the world?
>
> God, I can't belie
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 19:47 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> your patch works great here, on 3 separate systems: a 1-way, a 2/4-way
> and an 8-way.
>
> the 1-way system performed so well running the SMP kernel that i first
> thought i booted the UP kernel by accident :-)
>
> on the 8-way box, "hack
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
> fork() can be changed so as not to set up page tables for
> MAP_SHARED mappings. I think that has other tradeoffs like
> initially causing several unavoidable faults reading
> libraries and program text.
Actually, libraries and program text are usually ma
The partial disabling of Dinakar's new facility to allow
cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic sched domains
doesn't go far enough. At the suggestion of Nick Piggin
and Dinakar, let us instead totally disable this facility
for 2.6.13, in order to avoid problems first reported
by John Hawkes (cor
At the suggestion of Nick Piggin and Dinakar, totally disable
the facility to allow cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic
sched domains in Linux 2.6.13, in order to avoid problems
first reported by John Hawkes (corrupt sched data structures
and kernel oops).
This has been built for ppc64, i386,
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 21:34 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > does the system truly lock up, or is this some transitional condition?
> > > In any case, i agree that this should be debugged independently of the
> > > pi_lock patch.
> >
> > Hmm, I fo
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 13:43 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> This patch modifies the VFS setxattr, getxattr, and listxattr code to
> fall back to the security module for security xattrs if the filesystem
> does not support xattrs natively. This allows security modules to
> export the incore inode s
* Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > does the system truly lock up, or is this some transitional condition?
> > In any case, i agree that this should be debugged independently of the
> > pi_lock patch.
>
> Hmm, I forgot that you took out the bit_spin_lock fixes. I think this
> ma
>I'm not subscribed to the list and I use lynx and a small mda
>called msmtp, so I know it's awkward (perhaps mostly for me).
>>People seem to be CCing you, can't you reply to the message you
>>receive that way? That's how everyone else who doesn't subscribe
>>gets along...
>>
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:26:27 +0200, Manuel Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When I plug them in, they will be recognized by hotplug (I'm using udev), the
> module usb-storage will be loaded and the device nodes are created.
>
> BUT: There is normally just ONE device node for the disc block
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> Please include in -mm for wider testing prior to merging in 2.6.14.
Acked-by: James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
James Morris
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
* Chris Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'll have some numbers tomorrow. If you'd like to run SELinux that'd
> be quite useful.
These are just lmbench and kernel build numbers (certainly not the best
for real benchmark numbers, but easy to get a quick view run). This is
just baseline (i.e. d
Hi,
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 22:03, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> This simple patch provides a fix for a locking issue found in the online
> resizing code. The problem actually happened while trying to resize the
> filesystem trough the resize=xxx option in a remount.
NAK, this is wrong:
> +
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 12:43 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 10:36 -0700, john stultz wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 10:44 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > How can we munge these all together to come up with a single goodness
> > > factor for comparison? There's probably
Dear Sir/Madam,
We learnt your e-mail add.from internet.
FIRST OF ALL,PLEASE KINDLY NOTE THIS E-MAIL IS SENT BY
OUR "ADVERTISING COMPANY" AND THE E-MAIL ADDRESS IS
NOT "REAL"(VIRTUAL),THEREFORE,PLEASE CONTACT US
VIA "FAX" OR "POST".DON'T DIRECTLY RESPONSE VIA " E-MAIL"
BECAUSE WE CAN'T RECEIVE
1 - 100 of 282 matches
Mail list logo
