On Wednesday 30 March 2005 06:09 pm, linux-os wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Vicente Feito wrote:
> > Video memory is at b800:, for humans 0xb800, not at 0x000b8000
>
> Wrong. "real-mode" can use a segment address of b800, that doesn't
> work in protecte
Video memory is at b800:, for humans 0xb800, not at 0x000b8000
On Wednesday 30 March 2005 04:47 pm, linux-os wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, krishna wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > How can one debug kernel before there is no printk mechanism in kernel.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Krishna Chaitanya
>
>
As long as the variable doesn't get overflowed you would have a negation, you
shouldn't do dri_data[5] = ptr->dri * 0xff; if ptr->dri it's 255, but if
ptr->dri = 1 i.e. (like is set in zr36050_setup) then you would be getting
the negation, -1. the Direct rendering support is a flag afaik, so in thi
Hi,
Please consider applying (or droping).
Thank you.
Description: This patch prevent drivers from calling eth_header with a 802.3
frame using a len>1536. In such a case returns -EINVAL, which was hard to
choose because the ETH_HLEN is supposed to return.
Signed-off-by: Vicente Feito <
This is for workqueues, it includes schedule_work() and how to call it
http://lwn.net/Articles/23634/
Vicente
-
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.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
P
Why is it that p->mm it's checked inside oom_kill_task and again in
__oom_kill_task? Cause __oom_kill_task it's called in case p->mm not null and
not &init_mm, otherwise it just returns NULL, this has been bothering me,
I've patched with the last rc5 and it's still there, why?
Is there a chance
Hello
On Sunday 20 February 2005 11:44 am, you wrote:
>
> diff -u -U 7 /linux-2.6.11-rc4.changed/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c
> ../linux-2.6.11-rc4/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c
> --- /linux-2.6.11-rc4.changed/drivers/pcmcia/rsrc_nonstatic.c
> 2005-02-20 11:37:39.0 +0100
> +++
On Saturday 19 February 2005 04:57 am, you wrote:
> Vicente> I've been playing with workqueues, and I've found that
> Vicente> once I unload the module, if I don't call
> Vicente> destroy_workqueue(); then the workqueue I've created
> Vicente> stays in the process list, [my_wq], I d
On Saturday 19 February 2005 04:57 am, you wrote:
> Vicente> I've been playing with workqueues, and I've found that
> Vicente> once I unload the module, if I don't call
> Vicente> destroy_workqueue(); then the workqueue I've created
> Vicente> stays in the process list, [my_wq], I d
I've been playing with workqueues, and I've found that once I unload the
module, if I don't call destroy_workqueue(); then the workqueue I've created
stays in the process list, [my_wq], I don't know if that's meant to be, or is
it a bug, cause I believe there can be two options in here:
1) It's
10 matches
Mail list logo
