TripleX Chung wrote:
> Jesper Juhl wrote:
>> Note: my explanations below are based on how I understand these
>> things, but I'm not the trivial patch monkey nor did I help create
>> these guidelines, so I'm in no way authoritative on the subject.
>>
>> On 13/07/07, TripleX Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Al Boldi wrote:
>
> This should be the responsibility of the kexec'd hibernating kernel. Note
> though in (6), the normal kernel takes care of preparing devices, then the
> hibernating kernel dumps the image and either calls S4 or S3. On resume
> from S3 it can immediately switch over to the
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[snip]
>
> So if a user wants to install a kernel.org kernel on his system, (s)he'll have
> to compile and install two kernels with different options.
>
> That doesn't sound good to me. :-)
>
definitely. that sounds kind of strange, not to think of having to
remember wh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So I can say that in linux 'thread' == 'process'?
>
No. It's more like, in linux threads are visible to the kernel (unlike
in N:1 thread models, linux is 1:1). Threads are the basic unit of
scheduling.
A process can have >1 threads.
> Is kernel routine 'kthread' creat
Gautam Singaraju wrote:
> Is there any attempt being made to provide software based RSA
> cryptographic support in kernel? I see that Linux supports
> Hardware based cryptographic devices (VIA Padlock ACE). How is the
> performance of such hardware? How well are these devices supported?
> -GS
i fa
Renato S. Yamane wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is impossible use speedstep in my Laptop with Pentium M 1,86Ghz:
>
> #modprobe speedstep-centrino
> FATAL: Error inserting speedstep_centrino
> (/lib/modules/2.6.18-3-686/kernel/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/speedstep-centrino.ko):
> No such device
>
> To do that
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jun 25 2007 09:37, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 17:15:50 +0200 (CEST) Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>> On Jun 25 2007 11:12, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
It is also quite likely the reply was written before reading the other
comments. With the volume on lkml,
Grozdan Nikolov wrote:
> On Saturday 23 June 2007 19:53, you wrote:
>> On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 14:17 +0200, Grozdan Nikolov wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> Please CC me as I'm not subscribe to this mailing list,
>> Perhaps you should change that and find most answers for yourself.
>>
>>> Thanks!
>> Thanks!
>>
Hi,
I have a Kubuntu 7.04 distro with Qt4 development packages installed.
Trying to do a 'make xconfig' fails with:
HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep
HOSTCC scripts/basic/docproc
CHECK qt
*
* Unable to find the QT installation. Please make sure that
* the QT development package is correctly
Torsten Duwe wrote:
> On Saturday 23 June 2007, you wrote:
>
>> hmm, wasn't loadable kernel modules first implemented in SunOS 4.x [...]
> Yes, but that was pretty cumbersome. You had to resolve the symbols in user
> space, using a hopefully matching /vmunix. Linux was first to feature an
> in-k
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Here's an idea that just occurred to me, after all the discussions
> about motivations, tit-for-tat, authors' wishes and all.
>
> If GPLv3 were to have a clause that permitted combination/linking with
> code under GPLv2, this wouldn't be enough for GPLv3 projects to use
>
Theodore Tso wrote:
> Basically, in the US, you get the best justice money can buy. :-)
that has to be one of the best one-liners ever! :)
>
> - Ted
-jb
--
Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy.
-
To unsubscribe from th
Lee Revell wrote:
> On 6/12/07, R.F. Burns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is it possible to write a kernel module which, when loaded, will blow
>> the PC
>> speaker?
>
> LOL. May I ask what your use case is?
>
or isn't it mis-use case :)
> Lee
-jb
--
Tact is the art of making a point without m
Christoph Pleger wrote:
> Hello,
>
[snip]
> After the new kernel package had been created, I installed it. After
> that, I looked into the directory /boot and was very surprised: The
> initial ramdisk of the new kernel was much larger than the initrd of the
> old kernel. To find out the cause for
Stefan Richter wrote:
> Satyam Sharma wrote:
>> Coming back to the document, we do need to document / find
>> consensus on the "preferred" way to do similar business in the
>> kernel, and my opinion as far as that is concerned is to shun
>> volatile wherever possible (which includes the case origin
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 02:08:54AM +0530, jimmy bahuleyan wrote:
>> Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> [snip..]
>>> +
>>> + - The jiffies variable is special in that it can have a different value
>>> +every time it is referenc
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
[snip..]
> +
> + - The jiffies variable is special in that it can have a different value
> +every time it is referenced, but it can be read without any special
> +locking. So jiffies can be volatile, but the addition of other
> +variables of this type is strongl
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 08:22 +0100, Radoslaw Szkodzinski wrote:
>
>> I'd recon KDE regresses because of kioslaves waiting on a pipe
>> (communication with the app they're doing IO for) and then expiring.
>> That's why splitting IO from an app isn't exactly smart. It should a
18 matches
Mail list logo
