On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:54:56 +0100 (BST)
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm working on a device driver for a device that sits on the PC
>> memory bus. I need to reserve/protect the memory range that the
>> device occupies from the rest of the kernel/system. How do I do
>> that? I thin
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:32:21 -0500
Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ** Reply to message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 31 Aug 2000
> 08:57:20 -0700
>> Now the device behaves just like memory to the BIOS during POST
>> etc, and is in fact, exactly memory if no device drivers are
>> loaded
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 17:12:03 +0100 (BST)
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Now the device behaves just like memory to the BIOS during POST
>> etc, and is in fact, exactly memory if no device drivers are
>> loaded. If a device driver is loaded and it detects one or more
>> of these devices
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:09:48 +0200 (CEST)
Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> We then just follow the bios. You can also reserve blocks of
>> memory by hacking arch/i386/mm/init.c and marking them reserved
> in 2.4 there is an explicit interface for
On 06 Sep 2000 13:54:49 +0800
Ryan Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Problem is: I don't (think I) have filesystem access at init
>> time, and can't safely reserve specific physical memory after
>> init which seems to leave my only option being to pass in the
>> reservation specs from the bo
Hello,
You cannot use MMX registers in the kernel either, since the kernel doesen't
save and restore FX state (fxsave, fxrstor) either (just like
(fsave/frstor).
Best Wishes,
Lyle
** Reply to message from "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on
Tue,
19 Sep 2000 11:58:34 -0400 (EDT)
>Tel
Lyle
- Original Message -
From: "Ricky Beam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lyle Coder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: Question: Using floating point in the kernel
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Lyl
Hello,
I am still not sure why you cannot use an IPI for this... on the CPU that
you want to access this resource, send an IPI to all other CPUs, and add
code in handling that IPI that they should spin and wait till you are done
with accessing the chip... then let the other CPUs continue.
Best
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsub
Hi,
If you have a similar machine (in terms machine configuration) for both your
solaris and linux machines... could you tell us what the difference in total
time for 100 and 1 was? i.e... dont compare solaris with 100
descripters vs solaris with 1 descriptors, but rather
Linux 100 des
Hi,
If you have a similar machine (in terms machine configuration) for both your
solaris and linux machines... could you tell us what the difference in total
time for 100 and 1 was? i.e... dont compare solaris with 100
descripters vs solaris with 1 descriptors, but rather
Linux 100 descri
Hello,
Is someone working on Linus's poll variation discussed in this list a week
ago?
Thanks
Lyle
-
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.tux.org/lkml/
When a program does a malloc... the glibc gets atleast on page (brk)
[actually, glibs determins of it needs to brk more memory from the kernel...
because it maintains it;s own pool].. so if you malloc 4 byts, you can copy
to that pointer more than 4 bytes (upto a page size, ex 4K)... hope that
ans
Alan,
are you saying that rep;nop is not needed in the spinlocks? (because they
are for P4)
Thanks
Lyle
- Original Message -
From: "Alan Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Andre Hedrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Frank Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 07,
Hello,
2.4.0-test1 and higher. make sure you select PIII as the CPU in the config.
Best Wishes,
Lyle
--
Which version of the kernel is needed in order to run the following
program on an PIII?
void main()
{
__asm__ __volatile__("xorps %%xmm0, %%xmm1" ::: "memory");
}
astor
--
Alexande
hi,
I'm trying to dump some information from dev.c to user space
file.Following is the code which i'm using to write to user spcae
file.I'm using 2.6.22.x86_64 kernel.
#define _write(f, buf, sz) (f->f_op->write(f, buf, sz, &f->f_pos))
#define WRITABLE(f) (f->f_op && f->f_op->write)
int
hi,
I have added some code to netif_receive_skb function.As linux kernel
is multhreaded , so there is no gaurantee than mine code is completely
executed without being disturbed by any other process .Timer interrupt
handler is an example of code which might interrupt execution of mine
code.
I just
hi,
I'm trying to add some code to netif_receive_skb function in
dev.c file . The cycles consumed by that code was around 16 cycles on
Dual Core Opetron machine.I'm working on that code for last 6 months
now and the consumed cycles have always been around 16 cycles .I don't
touch any other
hi,
I am recieveing the packet on eth1 and want to send it through eth2.
I've written code in netif_recieve_skb function .This code changes the
mac header in sk_buff structure so that it can be send through other
interface card.But when i call ip_dev_find fucntion to get the second
interfac
hi,
I'm trying to implement a system call for x86_64. Mine processor is
dual core opetron.There is very little material on web for
implementing system calls for x86_64 processor for 2.6 series kernel.I
tried to implement a new system call by observing the existing
implementation but to no success
hi,
I'm doing trying to write some optimized code for AMD dual core
opetron processor.But things are getting no where.I've installed
Fedora 5 with 2.6 series Linux kernel and 4 series GCC
Following are few lines of code which are consuming close to 100
cycles.Yes this is not the forum for such
hi,
I'm profiling some part of kernel code.Mine profiling mechanism
is based on rdtsc instruction.
Please tell me if i'm profiling correctly.I'm teting linux kernel
2.6.15 and mine system is P4.
function(){
unsigned long long c1,c2,c3,c4,c5;
before=readtsc();
before
On 24.02.2014 19:39, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:14:27AM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 09:43 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 02:03:17PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 07:23 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek
>>> Will a multiboot2 tag with whole EFI memory map solve your problem?
>> I added such a tag in documentation and wrote a patch for it (attached).
>> Awaiting for someone to test it to commit
>
> Great! I think from Xen perspective we first need to have Xen be able
> to understand multiboot2 - t
On 30.10.2013 12:19, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Hi,
> multiboot2 protocol requires some more changes. However, about 80% of code
> is ready. In this case Xen and modules are loaded by GRUB2 itself. It means
> that all images could be placed on any filesystem recognized by GRUB2. Options
> for Xen and mo
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
> that memory map passed via relevant tag could not represent wide range
> of memory types available
On 21.10.2013 22:53, Seth Goldberg wrote:
>
>
> Quoting Daniel Kiper, who wrote the following on Mon, 21 Oct 2013:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
>> that memory map passed via relevant tag could not represent wide range
>> of memory types avai
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
> On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it w
On 22.10.2013 16:51, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> If you use 'linux' module, it will call ExitBootService.
> If you use 'multiboot' module, it will call ExitBootService too.
>
> So if you don't want to the module to call 'grub_efi_finish_boot_services'
> you need to use 'linuxefi' :-)
That's a v
On 22.10.2013 18:01, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:42:42PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>>
>>> There are two problems with this:
>>>
>>> 1) The kernel will only boot if it's signed with a key in db, not a key
>>> in
On 22.10.2013 18:14, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> > Are you (going to be) in Edinburgh? Matthew was just explaining a bunch
>> > of this stuff to me, it might be useful for you to get it from the
>> > horses mouth instead of laundered through my brain (which is a bit
>> > addled afterwards ;-)).
What and
On 22.10.2013 18:51, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:36:04PM +, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote:
>> I may be off-base, but when I was wading through the grub2 code earlier
>> this year, it looked to me like it was going to refuse to launch anything
>> via MB1 or MB2 if the current
On 22.10.2013 19:12, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> В Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:16:24 +0200
> Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
>
>> GRUB has generic support for signing kernels/modules/whatsoever using
>> GnuPG signatures. You'd just have to ship xen.sig an
On 23.10.2013 09:43, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:16:24PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>> Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
>> On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>>
On 23.10.2013 09:05, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Thanks. Could you send me a pointer to current multiboot2 protocol docs?
It's managed as "multiboot2" branch in our repo:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git
Note: we're in process of moving from bzr to git which may cause the
link to change.
sign
On 23.10.2013 15:13, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> - not make an ExitBootServices call - which it does right now in the Solaris
>GRUB2 case and in the Fedora GRUB2 case.
What about having a special tag in multiboot2 file header "RKEBSIHE":
"request to keep EFI boot services" and then bootload
> GrUB - which iiuc stays in memory
> after transferring control - could export its file system support to its
> descendants).
Xen shouldn't need to load any file after multiboot2 entry point. The
needed files would already be in memory with pointers to them passed.
If you insist on being able to
> I'm not a fan of Coreboot having invented its own nonstandard hacks, but
> I guess it is pretty much unavoidable.
It's completely avoidable. The stub can copy this information to
standard framebuffer info structure. The only missing thing is to apply
patch by cjwatson or mjg59 (I'm not sure now
On 06.09.2014 00:18, ron minnich wrote:
> Vladimir can you point me to that patch? This sounds interesting.
>
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/25/190
> ron
>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 06.09.2014 00:31, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 09/05/2014 02:23 PM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>> On 06.09.2014 00:18, ron minnich wrote:
>>> Vladimir can you point me to that patch? This sounds
>>> interesting.
>>>
>> https:/
40 matches
Mail list logo
