Hi all,
I was wondering why some of my disks don't show up in /proc/stat's disk_io
line. Specifically, my line says:
disk_io: (2,0):(144,144,288,0,0) (3,0):(35,35,140,0,0)
This equates to my floppy and first cdrom. I also have a second cdrom (RW)
and 2 hard disks. Looking at the code (k
Not to be pushy or anything but since I received zero responses to this I
was wondering what else I can do. I'd be happy to patch the problem myself
but I have no idea what the correct value for DK_MAX_MAJOR should be.
Anywho, if anyone has any thoughts I'd appreciate them.
--Rainer
> -Or
Hi all,
I'm trying to use autofs for the first time and am running into some
problems. First, the documentation seems quite weak, that is, I'm not sure
if what I have is what I should have. I managed to find an autofs version 4
pre 9 tarball on the kernel mirrors. This seem the latest bu
Hi all,
I have a 100% reproducable bug in all of the 2.4.0 kernels including the
latest stable one. The issue is that if I compile the kernel to support 4GB
RAM (I have 1 GB) and then try to access a samba mount I get an oops. This
ALWAYS happens. Usually after this the system is frozen (
I knew that, I was just testing you all. ;-)
\e hides his head in shame
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marcelo Tosatti
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 6:47 AM
> To: Rainer Mager
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&
ainer
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marcelo Tosatti
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 7:09 AM
> To: Rainer Mager
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Oops with 4GB memory setting in 2.4.0 stable
>
> >>EIP
Hi again,
It looks like some progress is being made, *wonderful*, as to some earlier
questions...
> I'll have a look tonight or so. It works for you on non-bigmem?
Yes. Absolutely no problems on non-bigmem.
> smb_rename suggests mv, but the process is ls ... er? What commands where
>
> smb_rename suggests mv, but the process is ls ... er? What commands where
> you running on smbfs when it crashed?
>
> Could this be a symbol mismatch? Keith Owens suggested a less manual way
> to get module symbol output. Do you get the same results using that?
Here is a newly parsed oops, this
Hi all,
I brought up this issue last month and had some response but as of yet my
particular problem still exists. In brief, X windows dies with signal 11. I
have done quite a bit of testing and this does not seem to be a hardware
issue. Also, I have never managed to get a signal 11 error
> Would this be an SMP IA32 box with glibc 2.2? I have two such boxen
> showing exactly the same behaviour, although I can't reproduce it at will.
Close, it is actually an SMP IA32 box with glibc 2.1.3. But you've now
convinced me to not upgrade glibc yet ;-)
--Rainer
-
To unsubscribe from thi
Thanks for all the info, comments below:
First, I ran X in gdb and got the following via 'bt' after X died. This is
my first experience with gdb so if I should do anything in particular,
please tell me.
#0 0x401addeb in __sigsuspend (set=0xb930)
at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sigsuspend.
Hi all,
Please respond directly since I'm not on this mailing list.
I have 2 intertwined problems that my initial web research has failed to
reveal help. I recently upgraded machines and the new one has 1GB RAM. If I
build a 2.4.0pre10 (or 8 or 9, I haven't tried earlier) kernel
Hi all,
I've searched around for a answer to this with no real luck yet. If anyone
has some ideas I'd be very grateful.
I recently upgraded to a new machine. It is running RedHat 6.2 Linux (with
a SMP 2.4.0test[8-11] kernel) and has a Matrox G400 in it. X is 4.0.1.
Anyway, about
Hi all,
Thanks for all the input so far. Regarding this...
> (I'm not sure exactly what cerberos does, do you have a link for it ?).
The official name is "Cerberus Test Control System" aka CTCS. I don't know
the official site but a search for this should reveal something. Anyway it
is a
: David Woodhouse
Cc: Andi Kleen; Rainer Mager; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark Vojkovich
Subject: Re: Signal 11
> > wrong with it. I've only seen this under 2.3.x/2.4 SMP kernels. I
> > would say that this is definitely a kernel problem.=20
>
> XFree86 3.9 and XFree86 4 were rock
Hi all,
About 1 month back I reported a problem with getting OOPs when running with
a kernel compiled with the 4GB memory setting. Since then I've finally
managed to get the ksymoops results. Where should I post them?
To review:
My machine has 1GB RAM. If I build a 2.4.0
Well, I just had a Signal 11 even with the patch. What can I do to help
figure this out?
Thanks,
--Rainer
-Original Message-
From: Alan Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 11:07 PM
To: David Woodhouse
Cc: Andi Kleen; Rainer Mager; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark
(This message contains a number of related replies.)
> From: Mike Galbraith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Is init permanently running after you see a couple of these?
No, that is, after 23 hours up time it has used only 6 seconds CPU time
(according to top).
That reminds me that I should repeat
Hi again,
Ok, I just upgraded to 2.4.0test12 (although I don't think there was any
work in 12 that directly addresses this signal 11 problem). When compiling
the new kernel I chose to disable AGPGart and RDM as suggested by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I will report later if this makes any differenc
Thanks for the info...
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff V. Merkey
> > So, is this related to the larger signal 11 problems?
>
> There's a corruption bug in the page cache somewhere, and it's 100%
> reproducable. Finding it will be tough
Ok, granted this will be tough but is
Mike et al,
I have no idea what IKD is and I don't know what to do with any results I
might find BUT I'd be happy to do this if it will help. Please pass on the
info with the instructions. Who should I report the results to?
--Rainer
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Galbr
Give that man a cigarit was an env var (not LOCALE but LANG). I'd
actually checked this but I didn't think that made a difference in my case.
Thanks Linus, now can you fix the larger signal 11 problem?
--Rainer
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds
> I'd guess that the pro
Err, for those of us who aren't up to our elbows in the kernel code, is
there a patch for this? Presumeably this will be rolled into 2.4.0test13 but
I'd like to try it out? Also, can someone summarize the fix in English along
with the expected, improved behavior (e.g. Linux will never have a signa
I was wondering if anyone had any new info/suggestions for the Signal 11
problem.
I think I last reported that I had tried 2.4.0test12 w AGPGart and DRM
turned off. This seemed a bit more stable but I did have X crash with
Signall 11 after about 1.5 days.
I'd really appreciate any advice on how
As per Russell King's suggestion, I ran memtest86 on my system for about 12
hours last night. I found no memory errors. Note that the tests did not
complete because I had to stop them this morning. I'll contiue them tonight.
They got through test 9 of 11.
As per David Ford's suggestion, I am loo
Hi all,
Well, I upgraded my system to glibc 2.2.1 with few problems. Unfortunately,
there are no improvements in my stability problems. X still dies.
So, I ask again, how can I debug this? How can I determine if this is a
kernel problem or not?
Thanks,
--Rainer
-
To unsubscr
-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Urban Widmark
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 1:23 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Rainer Mager; Scott A. Sibert
> Subject: [patch] smbfs cache rewrite - 2nd try
>
>
>
> Smbfs testers wanted
I agree that removing support for any hardware is a bad idea but I question
the idea of putting it all in one monolithic download (tar file). If we're
considering the concern for less developed nations with older hardware,
imagine how you would like to download the whole kernel with an old 2400 bps
28 matches
Mail list logo
