the kernel people made that change to the inode.c file, maybe
they could explain us (please!).
Thanks a lot to everyone and special thanks to Eelco!
Goodbye.
P.s.: yes, I am writing this email with Netscape Messenger with emails
stored on a VFAT partition and using the 2.4.0-prere
Hi,
I ran a few more benchmarks on 2.4.0 final with 3.6.24. The results were a
little susprising (all on the same box, just after boot, no X):
MB/susersystem cpu time
3.6.24 7.154.0177,6 25% 14:57.5
3.6.24 14.553.2152.4 47% 7:15.7
3.6.24 5
Hi,
there seems to be a bug in the vfat-module. When I mount my SCSI MO drive with a
512 bytes/block disk, everything works fine. If I do the same thing with a
disks with 2kB/block I can mount it and read the directory. Once I try to run a
programm from the disk or try to edit or copy a file in e
The netfilter configuration allowed you to illegally specify
FTP support as non-modular, yet NAT support modular. That
cannot work. I would suggest changing NAT support to be
non-modular if you want FTP support non-modular.
Rusty, I think this is another case where the netfilter config
should
On 2 Jan 2001, Christoph Rohland wrote:
> Gregory McLean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmall
> > 0
>
> That's your problem. Your limit for overall shm pages is zero. So you
> cannot allocate any shm segments.
>
> echo 200 > /proc/sys/kernel/shmall
>
> and check /etc/sy
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/arch/i386/lib'
ld -m elf_i386 -T /usr/src/linux/arch/i386/vmlinux.lds -e stext
arch/i386/kernel/head.o arch/i386/kernel/init_task.o init/main.o init/version.o \
--start-group \
arch/i386/kernel/kernel.o arch/i386/mm/mm.o kernel/kernel.o
ludovic fernandez wrote:
>
> george anzinger wrote:
>
> > Roger Larsson wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > This part can probably be put in a proper non inline function.
> > > Cache issues...
> > > +/*
> > > +* At that point a scheduling is healthy iff:
> > > +
george anzinger wrote:
> Roger Larsson wrote:
> >
>
> > This part can probably be put in a proper non inline function.
> > Cache issues...
> > +/*
> > +* At that point a scheduling is healthy iff:
> > +* - a scheduling request is pending.
> > +
Roger Larsson wrote:
>
> On Thursday 04 January 2001 09:43, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> > Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > The key idea here is to disable preemption on spin lock and reenable on
> > > spin unlock. That's a practical idea, highly compatible with the
> > > current way of doing things.
> udelay(15000); /* delay 15ms */
>
> the comment is just extra baggage. No sense touching it generally, but if
> you're gonna change it to mdelay..
The comments are 15 (50) implying someone swapped them around for a reason
and noted it
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscrib
Hi,
I have been doing some dbench runs with the original and latest (Jan 4 22:xx)
prerelease.diff kernels. Looks like both the latest kernels and the reiserfs
patch both are costing some performance.
prerelease
MB/susersystem cpu time
ext214.650.5s76.4s 2
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Once the comments are unweirded, they become completely superfluous. At
> > which point its best not to have them - when someone next comes along and
> > changes the delay, it might end up disagreeing with the comment and
> > causing confusion.
>
> Before y
On Thu, 04 Jan 2001, Gunther Mayer wrote:
>Jesse Pollard wrote:
>> Originally, (wayback machine on) this was handled by a pull-up resistor
>> in the parallel interface, on the "off-line" signal. ANY time the printer
>> was powered off, set offline, or cable unplugged, the "off-line" signal
>> was
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 04:36:32PM -0800, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> > Saying that, I definitely agree that I want/need to one day listen to
> > my MP3s while building my kernel.
>
> ??? I can listen to MP3s just fine while building kernels, on a not very
ludovic fernandez wrote:
> Right now I will be interested to run some benchmarks (latency but
> also performance) to see how the system is disturbed by beeing
> preemptable. I'm little bit lost on this and I don't know where to start.
> Do you have any pointers on benchmark suites I could run ?
>
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 04:36:32PM -0800, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> Saying that, I definitely agree that I want/need to one day listen to
> my MP3s while building my kernel.
??? I can listen to MP3s just fine while building kernels, on a not very
powerful K6.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * drivers/char/lp.c: Follow 2.2 behaviour more closely.
>
> --- linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/char/lp.c.offline Thu Jan 4 21:13:02 2001
> +++ linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/char/lp.c Thu Jan 4 21:42:19 2001
> @@ -207,7 +207,7 @@
Nigel Gamble wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> > This is not the point I was trying to make .
> > So far we are talking about real time behaviour. This is a very
>interesting/exciting
> > thing and we all agree it's a huge task which goes much more behind
> > just havin
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> This is not the point I was trying to make .
> So far we are talking about real time behaviour. This is a very interesting/exciting
> thing and we all agree it's a huge task which goes much more behind
> just having a preemptive kernel.
You're ri
> Once the comments are unweirded, they become completely superfluous. At
> which point its best not to have them - when someone next comes along and
> changes the delay, it might end up disagreeing with the comment and
> causing confusion.
Before you remove the comments check with the author and
Ignacio Monge ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> Problem: compile error in linux-2.4.0-prerelease-ac6
--- linux/drivers/char/serial.c.foo Thu Jan 4 17:31:43 2001
+++ linux/drivers/char/serial.c Thu Jan 4 17:32:38 2001
@@ -5184,12 +5184,12 @@
for (pnp_bo
Problem: compile error in linux-2.4.0-prerelease-ac6
System:
Intel Pentium II 233 Mhz 96 Mb RAM
Red Hat Linux System 7.0
Glibc-2.2-5
Gcc-2.95.2-12
Output error:
[...]
ld -m elf_i386 -r -o drm.o tdfx.o drmlib.a
make[4]: Saliendo directorio `/usr/src/linux
The only way to _assume_ a printer is online is to attempt a dummy poll for
information. Again note that this is a strong assumption as only some new printers
return data for a poll, and legacy printers control of the data port are undefined.
The poll btw needs to be done in userspace because pr
Roger Larsson wrote:
> On Thursday 04 January 2001 09:43, ludovic fernandez wrote:
>
> > I'm not convinced a full preemptive kernel is something
> > interesting mainly due to the context switch cost (actually mmu contex
> > switch).
>
> It will NOT be fully, it will be mostly.
> You will only con
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:39:57PM -0800, Nigel Gamble wrote:
> > Experience has shown that adaptive spinlocks are not worth the extra
> > overhead (if you mean the type that spin for a short time
> > and then decide to sleep). It is better to use spin_lock
On Thursday 04 January 2001 09:43, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > The key idea here is to disable preemption on spin lock and reenable on
> > spin unlock. That's a practical idea, highly compatible with the
> > current way of doing things. Its a fairly heavy hit on spinloc
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:39:57PM -0800, Nigel Gamble wrote:
> Experience has shown that adaptive spinlocks are not worth the extra
> overhead (if you mean the type that spin for a short time
> and then decide to sleep). It is better to use spin_lock_irqsave()
> (which, by definition, disables k
On Wednesday January 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 18:19:41 +0100, Otto Meier wrote:
>
> >>Dual Celeron (SMP,raid5)
> >> As stated in my first mail I run actually my raid5 devices in degrated mode
> >> and as I remenber there has been some raid5 stuff changed between
> >> tes
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Andi Kleen wrote:
> The problem is that current Linux semaphores are very costly locks -- they
> always cause a context switch.
My preemptible kernel patch currently just uses Linux semaphores to
implement sleeping kernel mutexes, but we (at MontaVista Software) are
working on
Hello everyone,
This patch is meant to be applied on top of the reiserfs
3.6.23 patch to get everything working in the new prerelease
kernels. The order is:
untar linux-2.4.0-prerelease.tar.bz2
apply linux-2.4.0-test12-reiserfs-3.6.23.gz
apply this patch
apply the fs/super.c patch to make sure
On Thu 4 Jan 2001 14:27:22 -0700,
Keith Whitwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It looks like this patch goes further than syncing with xfree 4.0.2,
> but syncs with the dri trunk instead. There has been a version bump
> in the mga drm module on the dri trunk to add a 'blit' ioctl. XFree
> 4.0
des. Here's a patch to do that. Look okay?
Tim.
*/
2001-01-04 Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* drivers/char/lp.c: Follow 2.2 behaviour more closely.
--- linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/char/lp.c.offlineThu Jan 4 21:13:02 2001
+++ linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/cha
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 08:35:02AM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > A more ambitious way to proceed is to change spinlocks so they can sleep
> > (not in interrupts of course). There would not be any extra overhead
>
> Imagine what happens when a non sleep
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> A more ambitious way to proceed is to change spinlocks so they can sleep
> (not in interrupts of course). There would not be any extra overhead
> for this on spin_lock (because the sleep test is handled off the fast
> path) but spin_unlock gets a littl
ASUS P2B-s PIII550 512M mem SCSI on board,
FD, CD, IBM DNES-30917W, 3c905B Cyclone,
kernel _WITHOUT_ modules, gcc-2.95.3-test1.
Little patch (from Andrea) in drivers/net/3c59x.c.
All perfect, compiles _AND_ works perfectly!
Regards
Mario
PS Not in lkml !!!
===
-
To unsubscribe from this lis
to kill...
Going through your README, you seem much more
advanced than this simple patch.
>
> although I have yet to put up a 2.4.0-prerelease patch (coming soon).
> We should probably pool our efforts on this for 2.5.
>
Agreed.
Right now I will be interested to run some benchmarks (lat
Rik,
It looks like this patch goes further than syncing with xfree 4.0.2, but syncs
with the dri trunk instead. There has been a version bump in the mga drm
module on the dri trunk to add a 'blit' ioctl. XFree 4.0.2 will barf on this.
As a broader question: All our version checking (in client
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> For hackers,
> The following patch makes the kernel preemptable.
> It is against 2.4.0-prerelease on for i386 only.
> It should work for UP and SMP even though I
> didn't validate it on SMP.
> Comments are welcome.
Hi Ludo
.]
> If this goes away:
>
> if ((status & LP_PERRORP) && !(LP_F(minor) & LP_CAREFUL))
> /* No error. */
> last = 0;
>
> then some people might not be able to print at all.
OK, how about this patch then?
--- linux-2.4.0-prerele
Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:52:29PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> > I think lp_check_status.
>
> Okay. So what about this patch instead? If the printer is off-line
> to start with, fall into parport_write anyway (it will just time out
> and return 0
2.4.0-prerelease-ac5
Happens during boot right after the RAID checksumming speed is calculated
I don't have CONFIG_HIGHMEM
This is booting from floppy to a RAID5 system:
md3 : active raid5 sdc1[2] sdb1[1] sda1[0] 97691008 blocks level 5, 32k
chunk, algorithm 0 [3/3] [UUU]
Compiler is
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Marko Kreen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:32:52PM +0200, Marko Kreen wrote:
> > -udelay(15000); /* delay for 50 (15) ms */
> > +mdelay(15); /* delay for 50 (15) ms */
>
> Per Mark Hahn suggestion here is a patch that fixes the weird
> comments too. This is cumul
OK, mystery (partially) solved. I have the Gnome CD Player applet running in my
panel. (Yeah, I know, if I'm running Gnome, I deserve whatever I get. :-)
Anyway, the CD player can be added to the panel in two forms: a launcher that
just launches the application window, and an applet that has
Jesse Pollard wrote:
> Originally, (wayback machine on) this was handled by a pull-up resistor
> in the parallel interface, on the "off-line" signal. ANY time the printer
> was powered off, set offline, or cable unplugged, the "off-line" signal
> was raised by the pull-up. No data lost.
>
> Now t
I'm running linux-2.2.18 and linux-2.4.0-prerelease on my laptop (p3-550,
440BX chipset). The machine dualboots with windows 2000, installed on
/dev/hda2 with NTFS. /dev/hda2 (as reported with fdisk) has 4707045
blocks. However, under linux-2.4.0-prerelease (and under
2.4.0-test13-pre
Allan,
my graphic card is a matrox 1- video card is a haupauge/model618pci , no AGP
or DRM. The output of ver_linux + lsmod below. There has to be significant
change from test13pre7 to prerelease ff. There is an immediate standstill,
nothing in /var/log/messages or /var/log/warn.
kind regards
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, ludovic fernandez wrote:
> The following patch makes the kernel preemptable.
> It is against 2.4.0-prerelease on for i386 only.
> Comments are welcome.
I think this would be a nice thing to start testing
once 2.5 is forked off.
regards,
Rik
--
Hollywood goes
- Received message begins Here -
Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:39:10PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> > As noted yesterday falling into parport_write will silenty lose data when the
> > printer is off.
>
> (Actually it depends; I think FIFO/DMA
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 03:39:10PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> As noted yesterday falling into parport_write will silenty lose data when the
> printer is off.
(Actually it depends; I think FIFO/DMA paths are fine, but yes, the
software implementation can lose data.)
> If it's not feasible
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:20:43PM +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> to start with, fall into parport_write anyway (it will just time out
As noted yesterday falling into parport_write will silenty lose data when the
printer is off.
If it's not feasible to make parport_write reliable against power-off
pr
> I've tested 2.4.0prerelease pure - ac1-ac2-ac3-ac4-ac5 and my system crashed
> whenever I left X.
> Having switched back to 2.4.0-test13pre7 all is fine.
> I'm no developer, so if you need more information, give me some hints.
What video card do you have and are you using AGP or DRM (an lsmo
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:52:29PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I think lp_check_status.
Okay. So what about this patch instead? If the printer is off-line
to start with, fall into parport_write anyway (it will just time out
and return 0). If LP_ABORT is set, we return -EAGAIN.
Tim.
*/
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 09:27:51AM +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> Believe it or not, there are some printers out there that wave
> LP_POUTPA all over the place even when they're happy: they set
> LP_PERRORP to mean 'happy', which is what the check is for.
I remeber that too, that's why we still have L
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:20:27AM +, Tim Waugh wrote:
> I wonder where the EIO is coming from though. Grep only shows up
I think lp_check_status.
} else if (!(status & LP_PSELECD)) {
if (last != LP_PSELECD) {
last = LP_PSELECD;
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:32:11PM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
> > I think a better way to proceed would be to make semaphores a bit more
> > intelligent and turn them into something like adaptive spinlocks and use
> > them more where appropiate (currently using semaphores usually causes
>
> I think a better way to proceed would be to make semaphores a bit more
> intelligent and turn them into something like adaptive spinlocks and use
> them more where appropiate (currently using semaphores usually causes
> lots of context switches where some could probably be avoided). Problem
>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:44:19PM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> When trying to print to an off-line printer with 2.4 kernels, the
> "write" system call to /dev/lp0 stalls for 10 seconds and then returns
> EIO.
I wonder where the EIO is coming from though. Grep only shows up
ieee1284.c (in pa
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:39:21AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:09:56AM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> > should say that it is obsolete. I think obsolete means "you should never
> > ever have to use this stuff".
>
> Agreed.
I think that LP_CAREFUL is still needed
Look at include/linux/smp.h: on SMP, it includes , on UP it
contains a
#define smp_num_cpus1
I assume that someone directly includes .
Try to add a
#ifndef __LINUX_SMP_H
#error Found it!
#endif
to the beginning of
--
Manfred
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsub
"Albert D. Cahalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> [spstarr@coredump /etc]$ free
> >> total used free sharedbuffers
> ...
> >> the shmfs is mounted. Is there any configuration i need to get
> >> shm memory activiated?
> >
> > The 'shared' field in /proc/meminfo
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:08:01AM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> The tunelp man-page seems to think there are printers that need the
> LP_CAREFUL handling. I also noted that if I disconnect my printer from
> the computer, the data will no longer be lost. Apparently the printer
> confuses the pa
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, ludovic fernandez wrote:
+#if 1
+/*
+ * I got some problems with PCMCIA initialization and a
+ * preemptive kernel;
+ * init_pcmcia_ds() beeing called before the completion
+ * of pending scheduled tasks. I don't know if this is the
+ * right fix though
Daniel Phillips wrote:
>
> The key idea here is to disable preemption on spin lock and reenable on
> spin unlock. That's a practical idea, highly compatible with the
> current way of doing things. Its a fairly heavy hit on spinlock
> performance, but maybe the overall performance hit is small.
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 08:35:02AM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> A more ambitious way to proceed is to change spinlocks so they can sleep
> (not in interrupts of course). There would not be any extra overhead
Imagine what happens when a non sleeping spinlock in a interrupt waits
for a "sleepi
ludovic fernandez wrote:
> The following patch makes the kernel preemptable.
> It is against 2.4.0-prerelease on for i386 only.
> It should work for UP and SMP even though I
> didn't validate it on SMP.
> Comments are welcome.
I was expecting to see this sometime in 2.
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001 23:51:31 -0500,
Frank Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello,
> I received the following make dep error while compiling
>prerelease-ac5 .
>make -C acpi fastdep
>make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux/drivers/acpi'
>/usr/src/linux/Rules.make:224: *** Recursive variab
Hallo,
I've tested 2.4.0prerelease pure - ac1-ac2-ac3-ac4-ac5 and my system crashed
whenever I left X.
Having switched back to 2.4.0-test13pre7 all is fine.
I'm no developer, so if you need more information, give me some hints.
kind regards
Norbert
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the li
Hello,
I received the following make dep
error while compiling prerelease-ac5 .
Regards,
Frank
make -C acpi
fastdepmake[4]: Entering directory
`/usr/src/linux/drivers/acpi'/usr/src/linux/Rules.make:224: *** Recursive
variable `CFLAGS' references itself (eventually). Stop.make[4]: L
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Rich Baum wrote:
> Here is a patch that removes more compile warnings from 2.4.0-
> prerelease. I left out files that have been fixed by Alan or myself in
> the ac kernels. I'll add more options to my config tomorrow to try to
> find more of these war
in smp.h macro
#define smp_num_cpus
etc...
have no effect on the kernel_stat.h file .
if might be undefined or declared elsewhere as an int or such...I added
#define smp_test_num_cpus
and replaced the occurence in kernel_stat.h and it worked ok
and tried to find where the smp_num_cpus define was
Hello,
For hackers,
The following patch makes the kernel preemptable.
It is against 2.4.0-prerelease on for i386 only.
It should work for UP and SMP even though I
didn't validate it on SMP.
Comments are welcome.
NOTES: since the lock implementation is modified,
you need obviously to re-co
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:09:56AM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> should say that it is obsolete. I think obsolete means "you should never
> ever have to use this stuff".
Agreed.
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:08:01AM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> What do you think about the following patch? It also works for all the
> tests mentioned in my previous message.
I'm worried somebody needed to disable LP_CAREFUL to print, probably it's not a
big deal to keep it. About the lp_wai
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
: I'm worried somebody needed to disable LP_CAREFUL to print, probably
: it's not a big deal to keep it.
I removed it because otherwise I would have had to do twice as many tests
to convince myself that all combinations of flags and printer states
work
0)
Kernel command line: auto BOOT_IMAGE=2.4.0pre ro root=805
BOOT_FILE=/boot/vmlinuz-2.4.0-prerelease
Initializing CPU#0
Detected 448.882 MHz processor.
Console: colour VGA+ 80x25
Calibrating delay loop... 894.56 BogoMIPS
Memory: 255640k/262080k available (1105k kernel code, 6048k reserved, 81k d
ctured a bit.
What do you think about the following patch? It also works for all the
tests mentioned in my previous message.
--- linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/char/lp.c.orig Wed Jan 3 18:48:39 2001
+++ linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/char/lp.cThu Jan 4 00:45:52 2001
@@ -188,10 +188,7 @@
If I mount and unmount a CD on my ThinkPad 600X under 2.4.0-prerelease, the
drive never unlocks and I can't eject the CD. It doesn't matter whether I read
any data from it or not before the umount command. Subsequent attempts to
access the drive in any way -- mount, dd, etc. -- ha
> recent kernels. It looks like there may be a slight drop
> in performance for -ac5. For -ac4 and -ac5, the throughput
-ac5 touches stuff which would have performance effects. That would be
reasonable to suspect.
- Rik's partial page changes
- A couple of other mi
This was performed with a Dell 420 dual P-III ( 256 MB, 733 MHz), with a
ST317221A ATA DISK drive and ReiserFS 3.6.23. Each test was
done under the same conditions, running KDE 2.0, one xterm,
right after booting. My script did not wait between runs.
2.4.0-prerelease: average 10.9536 MB/sec
Throughp
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 11:32:52PM +0200, Marko Kreen wrote:
> -udelay(15000); /* delay for 50 (15) ms */
> +mdelay(15); /* delay for 50 (15) ms */
Per Mark Hahn suggestion here is a patch that fixes the weird
comments too. This is cumulative to the previous patch.
--
marko
--- linu
> I get the following errors during the final linking of 2.4.0-prerelease
> on a Sparc IPX (sun4c). .config available upon request.
sun4c is badly broken at the moment for other reasons. However the problems
you are seeing should be fixed in cvs.
Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: se
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:00:59PM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> off. Apparently the printer tells the computer it is OK to send data
> to it when it is off.
So then parport_write is probably buggy because it's losing data silenty while
the printer is off. So the below is probably a band aid.
I hope these are right fixes...
--
marko
diff -urNX /home/marko/misc/diff-exclude linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/video/atyfb.c
linux/drivers/video/atyfb.c
--- linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/video/atyfb.cWed Jan 3 19:55:56 2001
+++ linux/drivers/video/atyfb.c Wed Jan 3 22:42:32
e during sending of a print
job. (tunelp -a and -o also work as expected.)
I also only get one DMA write timeout when putting the printer in
offline mode during sending, instead of repeated timeouts as I got
with the previous patch.
Here is the new patch:
--- linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/ch
ahh ok, so everythings fine then. It would be nice though to see that
value perhaps in future they'll be a way.
Thanks,
Shawn.
Doug McNaught wrote:
> Shawn Starr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [spstarr@coredump /etc]$ free
> > total used free sharedbuffers
>
>> [spstarr@coredump /etc]$ free
>> total used free sharedbuffers
...
>> the shmfs is mounted. Is there any configuration i need to get
>> shm memory activiated?
>
> The 'shared' field in /proc/meminfo (source for 'top' and 'free')
> has nothing to do with {SysV,PO
Shawn Starr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [spstarr@coredump /etc]$ free
> total used free sharedbuffers
> cached
> Mem: 62496 61264 1232 0 1248
> 28848
>
>
> There's no shared memory being used?
[...]
> the shmfs is mounted. I
er)
o Fix incorrect preprocessor use in umsdos(Andreas Franck)
o DRM makefile fix (Keith Owens)
o IDE 2.4.0-prerelease*1231.patch (Andre Hedrick)
o Fixes for CVS gcc and semaphores(Andreas
I have created the shm directory in /dev
drwxrwxrwt 1 root root0 Jan 3 09:51 shm/
in my fstab i have:
shmfs /dev/shm shm defaults 0 0
when I display with top:
Mem:62496K av, 61248K used,1248K free, 0K shrd,1868K
buff
Swap: 64252K av, 20016K used,
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 07:44:19PM +0100, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> Is there a better way to fix this problem?
It looks the simpler fix to me (main loop needs someway to handle errors
anyways) but ask Tim too.
Another way to fix it is to loop in interruptible mode inside lp_error waiting
the erro
ite timed out
Jan 3 18:54:37 ppro kernel: parport0: FIFO is stuck
Jan 3 18:54:37 ppro kernel: parport0: BUSY timeout (1) in compat_write_block_pio
Jan 3 18:54:37 ppro kernel: lp0 off-line
Is there a better way to fix this problem?
--- linux-2.4.0-prerelease/drivers/char/lp.c.orig
On 3 Jan 01 at 13:08, Udo A. Steinberg wrote:
> Alexander Viro wrote:
> >
> > In principle, it might be that d_find_alias() is broken. I don't see where
> > it could happen, but then I'm half-asleep right now... While we are at it,
> > do you have
>
> > * autofs
>
> Yes.
>
> >
I run 'swapoff -a' in the middle of 'make j10 bzImage'
with 32M (by lilo) and got this:
Jan 3 17:30:07 lenstra kernel: VM: Undead swap entry 000f3100
Jan 3 17:30:07 lenstra kernel: VM: Bad swap entry 000f3100
Jan 3 17:30:07 lenstra kernel: VM: Bad swap entry 000f3100
Jan 3 17:30:07 lenstra k
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 12:09:32PM -0800, J Sloan wrote:
> > # vgscan
> > vgscan: error while loading shared libraries: vgscan: undefined symbol:
> > lvm_remove_recursive
>
> This looks like an userspace compilation/installation problem of the new lvm
> ACPI: System description tables not found
I would check the Tyan pages for bios upgrades. I had to upgrade my bios
(gigabyte bxd dual cpu board) before w2k accepted the acpi tables.
Linux still refuses to accept the acpi tables :-(
--
Manfred
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
> If we find that somebody needs this reset, we can move the VRA enabling code
> after the codec reset code.
Thanks. That now all makes sense
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.t
Hi,
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> In principle, it might be that d_find_alias() is broken. I don't see where
> it could happen, but then I'm half-asleep right now... While we are at it,
> do you have
> * autofs
Yes.
> * knfsd
> * ncpfs
No, neither of these two.
-Udo.
-
T
On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Udo A. Steinberg wrote:
> Dan Aloni wrote:
> >
> > After a bit of few code reviewing, it looks like the only code that
> > assigns stuff to ->d_op in a nonstandard way is in fs/vfat/namei.c.
> >
> > Udo, are you using vfat?
>
> Yes.
In principle, it might be that d_find_
> EIP: 0010:[__switch_to+33/180]
> Code: 00 0c 08 60 00 00 00 b0
> 89 ca 08 60 4f 73 08 60 4f 73 08 74
These asm instructions look wrong to me:
00 0c 08 --> add %cl, (%eax, %ecx, 1)
60 --> pusha
Perhaps someone else overwrote random memory, and __switch_to crashed
later. Could you
On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 18:19:41 +0100, Otto Meier wrote:
>>Dual Celeron (SMP,raid5)
>> As stated in my first mail I run actually my raid5 devices in degrated mode
>> and as I remenber there has been some raid5 stuff changed between
>> test13p3 and newer kernels.
>So tell us, why do you run your ra
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
