> I assume you are maintaining them as separate patches anyway in order to
> be able to feed them to Linus.
Nope - the dependancies between them are too complex
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 30, Alan Cox wrote:
> > OTOH x86 is racy and there's no workaround available at the moment.
>
> -ac fixes all known problems there
Is there some place from where one can download all the patches in -ac
kernels as separate patches, not just one monster patch (same way Andrea
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 07:07:47PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 05:56:41PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > On alpha it's racy if you set CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC y (so don't do
> > > that as you don't need it). As long as you use only 1 entry of the pgd
> > > for the who
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 05:56:41PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On alpha it's racy if you set CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC y (so don't do
> > that as you don't need it). As long as you use only 1 entry of the pgd
> > for the whole vmalloc space (CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC n) alpha is
> > safe.
>
> It
> On alpha it's racy if you set CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC y (so don't do
> that as you don't need it). As long as you use only 1 entry of the pgd
> for the whole vmalloc space (CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC n) alpha is
> safe.
Its racy for all cases on the Alpha because the exception table fixes ar
On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 09:55:06PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Hmm. I was having problems reproducible with
> CONFIG_ALPHA_LARGE_VMALLOC n.
>
> Enabling the large vmalloc was my work around, because the large
> vmalloc whet back to the prelazy allocation code.
I don't have a clue about you
Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 05:27:10PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >
> > Do you know if anyone has fixed the lazy vmalloc code? I know of
> > as of early 2.4 it was broken on alpha. At the time I noticed it I didn't
> > have time to persue it, b
On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 05:27:10PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Do you know if anyone has fixed the lazy vmalloc code? I know of
> as of early 2.4 it was broken on alpha. At the time I noticed it I didn't
> have time to persue it, but before I forget to even put in a bug
> report I thoug
Do you know if anyone has fixed the lazy vmalloc code? I know of
as of early 2.4 it was broken on alpha. At the time I noticed it I didn't
have time to persue it, but before I forget to even put in a bug
report I thought I'd ask if you know anything about it?
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this li
From: "Andrea Arcangeli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[snip]
> > Is there any other patches you recommend me to apply to my kernel?
>
> specifically for the alpha (but of course ok for x86 kernels too) in
> order against pre7:
>
>
ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/kernels/v2.4/2.4.4p
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 05:34:01AM +0200, Magnus Naeslund(f) wrote:
> Hello yesterday i installed redhat6.2 on our little alpha server over here.
> It's an Ruffian EV56 system, and a hand upgraded redhat to be able to cope
> with 2.4.
>
> I got an compile error that told me that pte_alloc was dec
Hello yesterday i installed redhat6.2 on our little alpha server over here.
It's an Ruffian EV56 system, and a hand upgraded redhat to be able to cope
with 2.4.
I got an compile error that told me that pte_alloc was declared wrong in
some files..
Then in the back of my mind i figured that Andrea
12 matches
Mail list logo
