Re: [RPC][PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] limit total vfs page cache

Aubrey Li wrote: > On 1/19/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Aubrey, >> >> I used your patch on my PPC64 box and I do not get expected >> behavior. As you had requested, I am attaching zoneinfo and meminfo >> dumps: >> >> Please let me know if you need any further data

Re: [PATCH] seq_file conversion: coda

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 04:53:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:53:05 +0300 > Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Compile-tested. > > You can runtime-test this interface without ever having mounted a CODA fs. > > Please. compile-tested-only patches are alwa

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

Christoph's patch is better than mine. The only thing I think is that zone->max_pagecache_pages should be checked never less than zone->pages_low. The good part of the patch is using the existing reclaimer. But the problem in my opinion of the idea is the existing reclaimer too. Think of when vf

Re: [PATCH] MMC: au1xmmc R6 response support

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 07:56:51PM +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote: > > here's a trivial patch which adds R6 reponse support to the au1xmmc > > driver. Fixes SD card detection / operation. > > > NAK. MMC_RSP_R1 and MMC_RSP_R6 have the same value so this will break > the switch. not in my version of 2.

Re: [PATCH -mm 5/5][AIO] - Add listio syscall support

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:55:54 +0100 Sébastien Dugué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +asmlinkage long > +compat_sys_lio_submit(aio_context_t ctx_id, int mode, int nr, u32 __user > *iocb, > + struct compat_sigevent __user *sig_user) > +{ > + struct kioctx *ctx; > + struct lio_event

Re: [RPC][PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] limit total vfs page cache

On 1/24/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Aubrey Li wrote: > On 1/19/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Aubrey, >> >> I used your patch on my PPC64 box and I do not get expected >> behavior. As you had requested, I am attaching zoneinfo and meminf

Re: [PATCH -mm 5/5][AIO] - Add listio syscall support

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:55:54 +0100 Sébastien Dugué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +struct lio_event *lio_create(struct sigevent __user *user_event, > + int mode) > +{ > + int ret = 0; > + struct lio_event *lio = NULL; > + > + if (unlikely((mode == LIO_NOWAIT) && !user

Re: [PATCH -mm 4/5][AIO] - AIO completion signal notification

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:50:18 +0100 Sébastien Dugué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +static long aio_setup_sigevent(struct aio_notify *notify, > +struct sigevent __user *user_event) > +{ > + sigevent_t event; > + struct task_struct *target; > + > + if (copy_from

Re: [PATCH] select: fix sys_select to not leak ERESTARTNOHAND to userspace

From: Neil Horman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 15:13:32 -0500 > As it is currently written, sys_select checks its return code to convert > ERESTARTNOHAND to EINTR. However, the check is within an if (tvp) clause, and > so if select is called from userspace with a NULL timeval, then

Re: [PATCH -mm 5/5][AIO] - Add listio syscall support

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:55:54 +0100 Sébastien Dugué <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +void lio_check(struct lio_event *lio) > +{ > + int ret; > + > + ret = atomic_dec_and_test(&lio->lio_users); > + > + if (unlikely(ret) && lio->lio_notify.notify != SIGEV_NONE) { > + /* last one

Re: [PATCH] MMC: au1xmmc R6 response support

On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 06:52:02AM +0100, Manuel Lauss wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 07:56:51PM +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote: > > > here's a trivial patch which adds R6 reponse support to the au1xmmc > > > driver. Fixes SD card detection / operation. > > > > > NAK. MMC_RSP_R1 and MMC_RSP_R6 have

Re: [PATCH 2.6.20-rc5] Gigaset ISDN driver error handling fixes

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 18:42:13 +0100 (CET) Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > + mutex_init(&cs->mutex); > + mutex_lock(&cs->mutex); I have vague memories of making rude comments about this a few months ago. It is very weird to lock a mutex just after intialising it. I mean, if an

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

Christoph Lameter wrote: > This is a patch using some of Aubrey's work plugging it in what is IMHO > the right way. Feel free to improve on it. I have gotten repeatedly > requests to be able to limit the pagecache. With the revised VM statistics > this is now actually possile. I'd like to know mo

Re: [patch 00/46] High resolution timer / dynamic tick update

* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To lessen Andrews burden it would be wise to integrate the two trees > prior to anything going into -mm .. [...] i disagree. Thomas' tree has been tested in -rt for some time already, and he's the author of this code so as far as i'm concerned he ca

Re: [PATCH 0/3] i_ino uniqueness: alternate approach -- hash the inodes

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 13:57:38 -0500 Jeff Layton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The questions are: > > 1) how much would this slow down lookups for these filesystems? > 2) is it enough to justify adding more infrastructure to avoid it? > > What might be best is to start with this approach and then o

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 12:03:21AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Grant ! > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 09:52:44AM +1100, Grant Coady wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:05:44 -0700, dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 06:00:40PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > > >

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:19:37 -0700, dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 12:03:21AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: >> Hi Grant ! >> >> On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 09:52:44AM +1100, Grant Coady wrote: >> > On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:05:44 -0700, dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

Users have reported a symlink issue with my recent smbfs backport. Turns out my backport overlooked a second 2.6 patch w/ the fix: http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.6/?PAGE=cset&REV=419e7b76CdrmRG_NZ8LKj9DUUBGu1w This is a backport of Haroldo Gamal's 2.6 patch that fixes the symlink issue, an

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 08:04:36AM +1100, Grant Coady wrote: > Hi Dann, > I'm running slackware-11, no smbfs package, 'smbmnt' is from samba-3.0.23c > package with two tiny unrelated (?) patches: Thanks again Grant. You might check out the patch I just submitted - turns out this was an issue that

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 02:12:57PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > Users have reported a symlink issue with my recent smbfs backport. > Turns out my backport overlooked a second 2.6 patch w/ the fix: > > http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.6/?PAGE=cset&REV=419e7b76CdrmRG_NZ8LKj9DUUBGu1w Perfect. P

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:12:57 -0700, dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Users have reported a symlink issue with my recent smbfs backport. >Turns out my backport overlooked a second 2.6 patch w/ the fix: > http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.6/?PAGE=cset&REV=419e7b76CdrmRG_NZ8LKj9DUUBGu1w >

Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports

On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:46:24AM +1100, Grant Coady wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:12:57 -0700, dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Users have reported a symlink issue with my recent smbfs backport. > >Turns out my backport overlooked a second 2.6 patch w/ the fix: > > http://linux.bkb

Re: [PATCH 002 of 4] md: Make 'repair' actually work for raid1.

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 11:26:52 +1100 NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > + for (j = 0; j < vcnt ; j++) > + > memcpy(page_address(sbio->bi_io_vec[j].bv_page), > + >

Re: [PATCH] seq_file conversion: APM on arm

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 04:45:41PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > There is an ongoing desultory effort from Ralf to unify the ARM and MIPS > APM implementations. Independently converting them both to use seqfile > at this stage might muck that up. Ralf, talk to me? What happened with this anyway

Re: Is it possible to directly call do_path_lookup() in kernel?

I just successfully called do_path_lookup() in my kernel module. I just removed the "fastcall" from the declaration of do_path_lookup(), then the problem disappeared. I don't quite understand "fastcall" though. Can someone explain it? Thanks, -x On 1/23/07, Xin Zhao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Re: XFS or Kernel Problem / Bug

Hi! I do everything you like :-) if we can find the bug. So here are the files (2.6.18.6): http://server055.de-nserver.de/filemap.o http://server055.de-nserver.de/filemap.s Stefan Chuck Ebbert schrieb: Stefan Priebe - FH wrote: I've 3 Servers which works wonderful with 2.6.16.X (also teste

[newbie] Re: Is it possible to directly call do_path_lookup() in kernel?

On 2007-01-24, Xin Zhao wrote: > Archived-At: Hallo. > I just successfully called do_path_lookup() in my kernel module. I > just removed the "fastcall" from the declaration of do_path_lookup(), > then the problem disappeared. I don't quite un

Re: sigaction's ucontext_t with incorrect stack reference when SA_SIGINFO is being used ?

Nicholas Miell wrote: > so if uc_stack doesn't point to the stack in use immediately prior to > signal generation, this is a bug. Looking at arch/i386/kernel/signal.c (and others) inside setup_rt_frame(), the problem is pretty obvious: err |= __put_user(current->sas_ss_sp, &frame_user->uc.uc_stac

Re: [PATCH] Make CARDBUS_MEM_SIZE and CARDBUS_IO_SIZE customizable

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:30:27 +0900 (JST) Atsushi Nemoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] Make CARDBUS_MEM_SIZE and CARDBUS_IO_SIZE customizable > > CARDBUS_MEM_SIZE was increased to 64MB on 2.6.20-rc2, but larger size > might result in allocation failure for the reserving itself on s

Re: [PATCH] Make CARDBUS_MEM_SIZE and CARDBUS_IO_SIZE customizable

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 23:45:07 -0800 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > setup-bus.o is linked only on x86 oops, that's untrue. But it will break ppc32, I think. I suppose we can deprive the ppc32 guys of eight bytes of RAM. But putting cardbus things in pci.c seems wrong.. diff -puN d

Re: [RFC] Limit the size of the pagecache

On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 16:49 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > This is a patch using some of Aubrey's work plugging it in what is IMHO > the right way. Feel free to improve on it. I have gotten repeatedly > requests to be able to limit the pagecache. With the revised VM statistics > this is now a

Re: [PATCH 002 of 4] md: Make 'repair' actually work for raid1.

On Tuesday January 23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 11:26:52 +1100 > NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > + for (j = 0; j < vcnt ; j++) > > + > > memcpy(page_address(sbio->bi_io_vec[j].bv_page), >

[git patches] libata fixes

All fixes for ugly bugs and/or regressions. Please pull from 'upstream-linus' branch of master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git upstream-linus to receive the following updates: drivers/ata/ahci.c| 39 +++ drivers/ata/liba

What's in libata-dev.git

This is a summary and diffstat of all the changes pending in branch libata-dev.git#upstream for kernel 2.6.21. Items of note: * major sata_promise improvements, including PATA and ATAPI support * new drivers sata_inic162x, pata_it8213, MPC52xx * sata_via PATA port support * other minor improvemen

[patch] scsi: use lock per host instead of per device for shared queue tag host

The block layer uses lock to protect request queue. Every scsi device has a unique request queue, and queue lock is the default lock in struct request_queue. This is good for normal cases. But for a host with shared queue tag (e.g. stex controllers), a queue lock per device means the shared queue

Re: [2.6 patch] drivers/net/irda/vlsi_ir.{h,c}: remove kernel 2.4 code

From: Samuel Ortiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 23:36:58 +0200 > On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 10:56:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > This patch removes kernel 2.4 compatibility code. > Looks correct to me, thanks. > > > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Acked-by: Samu

Re: [2.6 patch] process include/linux/if_{addr,link}.h with unifdef

From: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 20:13:19 +0100 > After commit d3dcc077bf88806201093f86325ec656e4dbfbce, > include/linux/if_{addr,link}.h should be processed with unifdef. > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Applied, thanks Adrian. I believe at least

[git patch] net driver fix

As the patch indicates, the Al Viro patch had already been merged into my history (and another branch depending on it, making rebasing difficult if not impossible), but since it was merged by Linus, the actual patch isn't shown here by 'git diff'. Please pull from 'upstream-linus' branch of master

What's in netdev-2.6.git

This is the stuff queued for 2.6.21 in netdev-2.6.git#upstream. Nothing earthshakingly notable. A couple new drivers, a couple removed drivers, a bunch of driver updates. Adrian Bunk (4): remove the broken SKMC driver make hdlc_setup() static again remove the broken OAKNET driv

<    1   2   3   4