Re: Linux Kernel: get_user_pages_fast

[Mulyadi Santosa]

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Pablo Pessolani  wrote:
> Hi Mulyadi:
> I have developed Minix3 IPC primitives under Linux. One of it
> (sys_vcopy) allows to copy bytes from one process' user space to other
> process' user space.
> Those IPCs use spinlocks to synchronize and get_user_pages()  to copy
> bytes and/or pages from one process' address space to the other. All it
> works fine and with acceptable performance. Now, I want to improve
> performance using RCU and the "fast" version of get_user_pages().

hmmmcheck process_vm_rw_pages() at
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.7.1/mm/process_vm_access.c#L42

maybe that's what you need

-- 
regards,

Mulyadi Santosa
Freelance Linux trainer and consultant

blog: the-hydra.blogspot.com
training: mulyaditraining.blogspot.com

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: how to use git bisect on such seanario

[bill4carson]

thanks, I know what you mean, let the good be "bad",and the bad be "good"


On 2012年12月24日 10:57, Subramaniam Appadodharana wrote:
> It should work the same way as for finding a bug. Only the "bad" commit would 
> simply be the one to solve the bug
> 
> On Sunday, December 23, 2012, bill4carson  > wrote:
>  > Hi, list
>  >
>  > Usually, we use git bisect to identify which commit causes trouble,
>  >
>  > while how do I do when need to find out which commit solve problem?
>  > for example, it's know there is an bug since commit A, but I find out
>  > the newest version (commit B)is good, so one commit between commit A and
>  > B solve the problem,
>  >
>  >
>  > thanks
>  >
>  > --
>  > 浮沉随浪只记今朝笑
>  >
>  > --bill
>  >
>  > ___
>  > Kernelnewbies mailing list
>  > Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org 
>  > http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>  >

-- 
浮沉随浪只记今朝笑

--bill

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: how to use git bisect on such seanario

[Subramaniam Appadodharana]

It should work the same way as for finding a bug. Only the "bad" commit
would simply be the one to solve the bug

On Sunday, December 23, 2012, bill4carson  wrote:
> Hi, list
>
> Usually, we use git bisect to identify which commit causes trouble,
>
> while how do I do when need to find out which commit solve problem?
> for example, it's know there is an bug since commit A, but I find out
> the newest version (commit B)is good, so one commit between commit A and
> B solve the problem,
>
>
> thanks
>
> --
> 浮沉随浪只记今朝笑
>
> --bill
>
> ___
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

how to use git bisect on such seanario

[bill4carson]

Hi, list

Usually, we use git bisect to identify which commit causes trouble,

while how do I do when need to find out which commit solve problem?
for example, it's know there is an bug since commit A, but I find out
the newest version (commit B)is good, so one commit between commit A and
B solve the problem,


thanks

-- 
浮沉随浪只记今朝笑

--bill

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: How do I know if I have ISA bus

[Yang Chengwei]

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:02:37AM +0800, Woody Wu wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> If my system has ISA bus and some ISA devices attched to it, can I
> confirm that by checking the existence of any file in /proc, /sys or
> /dev?

I think yes if every thing works fine, start from a distro is a good
idea.

--
Thanks,
Chengwei

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> woody
> I can't go back to yesterday - because I was a different person then.
> 
> ___
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

How do I know if I have ISA bus

[Woody Wu]

Hi, 

If my system has ISA bus and some ISA devices attched to it, can I
confirm that by checking the existence of any file in /proc, /sys or
/dev?

Thanks.

-- 
woody
I can't go back to yesterday - because I was a different person then.

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: Why can not install kernel headers?

[Alexei Colin]

On 12/23/2012 12:01 PM, mobile.parmenides wrote:
> 
> I am reading an article about kernel header installtion, its links as 
> follows: 
> http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.32/Documentation/make/headers_install.txt#L11
> 
> Following a command given by the article:
>   make headers_install ARCH=i386 INSTALL_HDR_PATH=/usr/include
> the kernel headers should be installed into '/usr/include'. However, when 
> checking 
> '/usr/include/linux' and '/usr/include/asm', I found actually these kernel 
> headers have
> not installed (by checking timestamps). 
> 
> In fact, kernel headers have be installed into 'include' subdirectory of 
> kernel top-level 
> directory. Obviously,  the 'INSTALL_HDR_PATH' parameter in the above command 
> does not take effect. Is there any way to deal with the problem? If I have to 
> use 'cp' to
> install headers by hand, the 'INSTALL_HDR_PATH' seems not to play its roles.
The following contradicts the examples in
Documentation/make/headers_install.txt, but in my case (android tree),
the make command creates an 'include' subdirectory in $INSTALL_HDR_PATH.
That is, if I do
make INSTALL_HDR_PATH=/path/to/headers/ headers_install
Then, the headers are installed into /path/to/headers/include.

___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Re: Difference x86 and x86_64

[Gaurav Jain]

x86 is a 32-bit Processor architecture. x86_64 is the 64-bit Processor
architecture. Software (including Linux kernel) designed for a 32-bit
processor can run on both a 64-bit as well as a 32-bit processor, however
software designed for 64-bit processor can't be executed on a 32-bit
processor.

~Gaurav


On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Shraddha Kamat  wrote:

> I used x86 - bzImage to boot my machine and 'uname -a' shows this :-
>
> Linux phx4 3.7.1 #3 SMP Sun Dec 23 16:28:20 IST 2012 x86_64 x86_64
> x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> where I see x86_64 arch (and not x86_64) ???
>
> What is the difference between arch/x86 and arch/x86_64 ?
>
>
> -- Shraddha
>
>
> ___
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>



-- 
Gaurav Jain
Associate Software Engineer
VxVM Escalations Team, SAMG
Symantec Software India Pvt. Ltd.
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Why can not install kernel headers?

[mobile . parmenides]

I am reading an article about kernel header installtion, its links as follows: 
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.32/Documentation/make/headers_install.txt#L11

Following a command given by the article:
make headers_install ARCH=i386 INSTALL_HDR_PATH=/usr/include
the kernel headers should be installed into '/usr/include'. However, when 
checking 
'/usr/include/linux' and '/usr/include/asm', I found actually these kernel 
headers have
not installed (by checking timestamps). 

In fact, kernel headers have be installed into 'include' subdirectory of kernel 
top-level 
directory. Obviously,  the 'INSTALL_HDR_PATH' parameter in the above command 
does not take effect. Is there any way to deal with the problem? If I have to 
use 'cp' to
install headers by hand, the 'INSTALL_HDR_PATH' seems not to play its roles.



--
mobile.parmenides
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Difference x86 and x86_64

[Shraddha Kamat]

I used x86 - bzImage to boot my machine and 'uname -a' shows this :-

Linux phx4 3.7.1 #3 SMP Sun Dec 23 16:28:20 IST 2012 x86_64 x86_64
x86_64 GNU/Linux 

where I see x86_64 arch (and not x86_64) ???

What is the difference between arch/x86 and arch/x86_64 ?


-- Shraddha


___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies