[Apologize for the double-post, messed up with my mailer... ]
2007/8/8, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I don't see why we have to worry about cache corruption in the case at
> > hand. Write-combining is needed to map io (typically pci-mem regions)
> > which are never mapped cachable anywhere,
Adds support for write-combining in pci_mmap_page_range using PAT6.
Some distinction has to be made between huge pages and normal pages since
the position of the bit encoding PAT depends on that.
Signed-off-by: Cedric Augonnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Loic Prylli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Brice Gog
This sets PAT6 to write combining during boot on i386 and x86_64
Signed-off-by: Cedric Augonnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Loic Prylli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -urN 2.6.23-rc2/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/Makefile 2.6.23-rc2-pat/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/Makefile
--- 2.6.
Hi all,
For quite a while now, there as been numerous attempt to introduce support for
Page Attribute Table (PAT) in the Linux kernel, whereas most other OS already
have some support for this feature. Such a proposition popping up periodically,
perhaps it would be an opportunity to fix that lack f
2007/7/22, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sun, 2007-07-22 at 18:49 -0400, Cédric Augonnet wrote:
> iff -urN a/arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_cat.c
> b/arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_cat.c
> --- /home/gonnet/tmp/linux-2.6.22/arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_cat.c
2
2007/7/22, Cédric Augonnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
2007/7/21, Gabriel C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed this warnings on current git:
>
>
> ...
>
> arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_thread.c: In function 'thread':
> arch/i386/mach
Hi,
2007/7/21, Gabriel C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
I noticed this warnings on current git:
...
arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_thread.c: In function 'thread':
arch/i386/mach-voyager/voyager_thread.c:113: warning: no return statement in
function returning non-void
...
I think return 0; is mi
2007/7/12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 11:08:52AM -0300, Renato S. Yamane wrote:
> Vijayakumar Subburaj escreveu:
> >My first mail to lkml.
>
> Welcome :-)
>
> >I would like to know what happened to linux kernel from its 1.0.
>
> From 1.0 to 2.6.22.1?
> Woww
2007/7/10, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi all,
> + size = sizeof(struct transaction_stats_s);
> + s->stats = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (s == NULL) {
> + kfree(s);
> + return -EIO;
ENOMEM
I'm sorry if i missed some point, but i just don't see
2007/5/14, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 5/14/07, Dmitry Torokhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Satyam,
>
> On Saturday 12 May 2007 01:45, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > Seems to be good-looking code!
>
> Thanks. Do you have the hardware? Were you able to test the patch?
Oh, sorry, no. I was
2007/5/13, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 17:18 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The patch titled
> timer_stats slimmed down: using statistics infrastucture
> has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
> timer_stats-slimmed-down-using-statistics-infra
2007/2/17, Cédric Augonnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
2007/2/17, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Cédric Augonnet wrote:
That is my all point actually, i am not telling i have a valid
partition. I'm just describing the fact that the minix fs driver is
making too many assumpti
2007/2/17, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Cédric Augonnet wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 2.6.20-rc6-mm3 and 2.6.20-mm1, i get an OOPS when using the minix 3
> file system. I enclose the dmesg and the .config to that mail.
>
> Here are the steps to reproduce this oo
2007/2/17, Daniel Aragonés <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 2/17/07, Cédric Augonnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It appears that the trouble is in the count_free of file
> fs/minix/bitmap.c . This procedure is actually called twice when we
> issue a df command.
> The point w
2007/2/17, Daniel Aragonés <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Well, a glance at your dmesg doesn' show that a minix partition was
recognized. Otherwise it would sow it. So you have not such a
partition within your drives.
You are using an emulator to run minix. You will have the same problem
if you run minix
15 matches
Mail list logo
