Greg KH wrote:
> Why doesn't it work? Doesn't modprobe come right back and the init
> sequence still takes a while to run? What exactly fails?
I guess ...
> @@ -5429,9 +5429,19 @@ mptsas_init(void)
> return error;
> }
>
> +static struct task_struct *init_thread;
> +
> +static int __ini
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:22:14AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Tetsuo is it possible / desirable to allow tasks to not kill unless the
> > reason is OOM ? Its unclear if this was discussed before, sorry if it was,
> > have just been a bit busy today to review the archi
Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Tetsuo is it possible / desirable to allow tasks to not kill unless the
> reason is OOM ? Its unclear if this was discussed before, sorry if it was,
> have just been a bit busy today to review the archive / discussions on this.
Are we aware that the 10 seconds timeout af
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 03:25:29PM -0700, Benjamin Poirier wrote:
> On 2014/07/29 21:07, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Greg KH
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 05:26:34PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > >> To ignore SIGKI
On 2014/07/29 21:07, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 05:26:34PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > >> To ignore SIGKILL ?
> > >
> > > Sorry, I thought this was a userspace change that caused this.
> >
Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 05:26:34PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >> To ignore SIGKILL ?
> >
> > Sorry, I thought this was a userspace change that caused this.
> >
> > As it's a kernel change, well, maybe that patch
6 matches
Mail list logo
