Re: Problems with kernel updates needing non-kernel changes
On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 20:25 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jeremy Katz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > > > options snd-hda-intel index=0 > > > > Ugh... system-config-soundcard seems to be doing so. And it really > > really shouldn't be doing that as it's ultimately way too fragile to > > do :-/ > > It's the only way to get persistent device ordering for sound cards. Yay > crappy APIs. Crap like that can hopefully go the way of the Dodo once we start using PulseAudio by default; won't happen for Fedora 7 though... David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Keep the FC6 kernel at 2.6.20 or move it to 2.6.21?
On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 17:23 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:47:55PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > I'd say let F7 testing iron out 2.6.21 for a while before deciding about > > FC6. We should be in the part of freeze where serious Fedora weenies are > > doing a lot of testing. > > Getting 2.6.21 into FC6 does also have the additional advantage that > it's an extra round of testing for what will become the F7 kernel. > > It'd be a good idea to nail some of the known outstanding regressions > first though I think. Please also test that FC6 user space works with this new kernel. Thanks. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
uevent order fix
Dave, Please take a look at http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=2c7afd125cc482dbdf6b0a169c42337e7e76cda5 Can we include this simple patch in Fedora 7 and Rawhide please? Without this, events arrive in the wrong order meaning that udev and hal may get confused. Thanks. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: uevent order fix
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 14:59 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 09:24:09AM -0400, David Zeuthen wrote: > > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=2c7afd125cc482dbdf6b0a169c42337e7e76cda5 > > > > Can we include this simple patch in Fedora 7 and Rawhide please? Without > > this, events arrive in the wrong order meaning that udev and hal may get > > confused. Thanks. > > Are you sure this is the diff you want? The changelog comment doesn't > really imply anything regarding ordering. Yea, I'm 100% positive - the problem is that uevents for "struct class_device" don't include the PHYSDEV* variables. This makes it impossible for udev to reorder the events, e.g. wait for the device that PHYSDEVPATH that the class device specifies. As a result you sometimes get to process the event for an input device *before* the physical device (e.g. USB interface) have been processed. SCSI generic devices are affected in a similar way. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: 2.6.23 and newer kernel and option ACPI_PROC_EVENT.
(Moving from fedora-devel-list to fedora-kernel-list) On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 17:14 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 11:38:04AM +0200, Zdenek Prikryl wrote: > > > > > I think acpid will have to be ported to this new ABI. > > > > > Yes, acpid will have to be ported, but it takes some time. But > > meanwhile, I think it is useful to enable old code. > > Yes, I'll turn it back on for F8. I disabled it to find out > just how much stuff is depending on it. Seems just acpid :-) Also hal. We still need /proc/acpi/event as the ACPI battery and ac_adapter drivers in the kernel haven't been ported to use sysfs. Hence, without the /proc/acpi/event socket we don't get change notifications [1]. Actually I'm unsure what the sysfs interfaces will end up looking like and how change notification will work. Does anyone know? I know dwmw2 did some work here (for OLPC) defining a sysfs class but I've also seen other patches with different interfaces fly by. Richard added support in hal for at least one of these [2] so maybe it will just work out of the box. dwmw2? David [1] : Actually we do poll all battery and ac_adapter devices every 30 secs (because some hardware is broken) so the changes are propagated to policy agents like gnome-power-manager with a 0-30 sec delay. [2] : http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=hal.git;a=commitdiff;h=356ccdfa3bbf64648c48da8b756eaccef13d0dd9;hp=a2baf6b11fed6d64bf4e01db6e9a0fe279d7ee43 ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Getting rid of sysprof-kmod
On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 19:09 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 01:02:23AM +0100, Gianluca Sforna wrote: > > Hi, > > I just finished removing the sysprof-kmod package from CVS as mandated > > by the new guidelines for F9 and above. > > > > I am now seeking some help to understand what is needed to have again > > the kernel module required for proper operations of the sysprof > > package. > > > > Upstream sources are at: > > http://www.daimi.au.dk/~sandmann/sysprof/ > > The upstream kernel is likely to eventually get support for > perfmon2 integrated, but this could really use more work. > It's been in -mm for a while. If there's anything that sysprof > can do that perfmon can't (which would be surprising given > perfmons featuritis) it would useful to talk with the perfmon > developers so we can eventually arrive at an upstreamed solution > and not have to worry about integrating out-of-tree patches. Until that happens can we please carry the patch in the Fedora kernel? IIRC it's not invasive at all. And it's really annoying not being able to use sysprof. Thanks. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Getting rid of sysprof-kmod
On Sun, 2007-12-02 at 02:10 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 02:04:01AM -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > The problem is I really hate adding patches that provide new user interfaces. > It's easy enough to add it, but it'll be a 'fedora-ism' that doesn't work > in any other distro, or with an upstream kernel. And what happens > if someone starts building more things on top of the sysprof exports? > > It's the same reason patches that add syscalls get vetoed. We don't > want to be in a situation where it appears we're locking users into > running our distro/kernel. What if the sysprof author offered a. to maintain the patch in the SRPM (e.g. make sure it works) b. to work with upstream to either get it his patch in or migrate to another interface when available Would that work? Dave? Søren? David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: kernels won't boot
On Sat, 2007-12-22 at 08:28 -0500, Steve Grubb wrote: > On Saturday 22 December 2007 07:16:32 Build System wrote: > > kernel-2.6.24-0.123.rc6.fc9 > > --- > > * Fri Dec 21 2007 David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > - Disable CONFIG_PS3_USE_LPAR_ADDR to fix PS3 memory probing > > > > * Fri Dec 21 2007 John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > - Yet another round of wireless updates... > > > > * Thu Dec 20 2007 Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > - 2.6.24-rc6 > > > After build 81, I have not been able to boot any of the x86_64 rawhide > kernels. They all end with: > > Trying to resume from /sys/block/sda/sda3 > Unable to access resume device (/sys/block/sda/sda3) > Creating root device > Mounting root filesystem > mount: could not find '/dev/root' > Setting up other filesystems > Setting up new root fs > setuproot: moving /dev failed: No such file or directory > no fstab.sys, mounting internal defaults > setuproot: error mounting /proc: No such file or directory > setuproot: error mounting /sys: No such file or directory > Switching to new root and running init > unmounting old /dev > unmounting old /proc > unmounting old /sys > switchroot: mount failed: No such file or directory > Booting has failed. > > Rebooting into trusty old 2.6.24-0.81.rc4.git7.fc9 works fine. Are other > people running into this? I'm still seeing this too on all my x86 and x86_64 boxes with all kernels including todays update. Peter, Dave, any clue? David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: kernels won't boot
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 14:08 -0500, Eric Paris wrote: > > Can you show me more of the log? > > The log is more sgrubb. > I think selinux-policy is busted at the moment. depmod and mkinitrd are > having trouble in enforcing... > > rpm -e kernel-2.6.24-133-blah-blah > setenforce 0 > yum update kernel > setenforce 1 > > if that fixes it blame selinux > > Also get the same result if you don't have your storage driver > in /etc/modprobe.conf so you can look there first... I'm not running SELinux enforcing mode on any of my machines.. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: kernels won't boot
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 14:09 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote: > On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 14:08 -0500, Eric Paris wrote: > > > Can you show me more of the log? > > > > > The log is more sgrubb. Eh.. From.. the log is from sgrubb. That's what I meant. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: kernels won't boot
Hi, We're now tracking this issue in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427439 David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Disable CONFIG_ACPI_SYSFS_POWER?
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 11:23 +0100, drago01 wrote: > > Yeah, you need a new enough hal aparently, which I guess f8 didn't have. > > F9 should be safe to be using just the sysfs stuff. > > I have not tested rawhide on a laptop yet, but it seems that rawhide > still uses hal-0.5.10 (which is also the lastest upstream); on F8 this > one was not working for me. > But David might know more The fixes should be in git (maybe, when I checked a few months ago some bits were missing from sysfs); I'll test and put a newer snapshot in later this week. David ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
