Re: [Query]: Can people post to this mailing list without subscription?

[Viresh Kumar]

On 20 February 2013 11:00, Amit Kucheria  wrote:
> Yes, the moderator lets these emails in and whitelists known upstream
> developers upon request. Please let Anmar or Philip know any such
> email addresses.

Okay. I got this.

But what i requested was a bit more than that... In current case somebody has
to ask moderators to whitelist few mainline developers, but many a times when
we are in cc of original mail, we don't realize that mails aren't
reaching everybody
on list.

The idea i had was, moderators should monitor all the mails which aren't being
delivered to our lists, check if they are spam or not, in case they aren't spam
(which is pretty easy to find), add senders mail id in whitelist (or
whatever it is called).

That would make things work quickly and would be much more efficient.

--
viresh

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [Query]: Can people post to this mailing list without subscription?

[Amit Kucheria]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Viresh Kumar  wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I really don't know whom to direct this mail to and hence the wide spread.
>
> Problem: When we send a mail to kernel mailing lists with linaro-dev
> or linaro-kernel
> in cc, and we get replies to those mails, sometimes the mails from
> outside people
> doesn't reach us back on linaro mailing lists. And i hope the reason
> behind that is
> those people aren't subscribed to these lists.

Yes that is the reason

> For me it makes some sense to allow anyone to send mails to this list. Can 
> that
> request be considered?
>
> I believe the idea behind blocking such use is for protecting against
> spam mails, but
> these mails/replies are really important and we certainly need them
> delivered to us.
>
> One solution (don't know if its possible) would be to monitor mails
> from non-subscribers
> and few people from Linaro can permit them on daily/hourly basis, so
> that we don't get any
> spam mails, but that would be a burden.

Yes, the moderator lets these emails in and whitelists known upstream
developers upon request. Please let Anmar or Philip know any such
email addresses.

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

[Query]: Can people post to this mailing list without subscription?

[Viresh Kumar]

Hi Guys,

I really don't know whom to direct this mail to and hence the wide spread.

Problem: When we send a mail to kernel mailing lists with linaro-dev
or linaro-kernel
in cc, and we get replies to those mails, sometimes the mails from
outside people
doesn't reach us back on linaro mailing lists. And i hope the reason
behind that is
those people aren't subscribed to these lists.

For me it makes some sense to allow anyone to send mails to this list. Can that
request be considered?

I believe the idea behind blocking such use is for protecting against
spam mails, but
these mails/replies are really important and we certainly need them
delivered to us.

One solution (don't know if its possible) would be to monitor mails
from non-subscribers
and few people from Linaro can permit them on daily/hourly basis, so
that we don't get any
spam mails, but that would be a burden.

--
viresh

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[Alexander Sack]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, James Tunnicliffe
 wrote:
> On 19 February 2013 16:08, Alexander Sack  wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:53 PM, James Tunnicliffe
>>  wrote:
>>> Good point! I would be pleasantly surprised if an image + hwpack from
>>> 2010 worked with our current tools.
>>
>> Actually, I am surprised if they do not work.
>>
>> Our official promise on lit has always been that:
>>  1. all hwpacks and rootfs ever produced before a lmc release will
>> work with that lmc
>>  2. lmc will work well on most recent Ubuntu release as well as on all
>> Ubuntu LTS still supported by Canonical
>>
>> So moving forward let's do this:
>>  + find out if latest lmc works with the hwpack/rootfs stuff above -
>> maybe it is all good actually - the wiki instructions refer to an old
>> lmc version.
>>  + ensure that we have hwpack rootfs version as old as the above in our CI
>>  + use this opportunity to review if our CI tests have other gaps that
>> we need to fill to know whether we are green wrt 1. and 2. above
>>  + fix failures including removing online requirement when they come up.
>>
>> Guess a blueprint about "lmc legacy support investigation and
>> resurrection" might be the way to go.
>
> Interesting. We have had a blueprint about dropping Hardware Pack v1
> support ready to go for a while. There is a lot of "if v1, else" code
> in Linaro Image Tools that we would like to get rid of.
>
> In the original case we have an image based on an unsupported Ubuntu
> version, which no longer has packages on
> http://ports.ubuntu.com/dists/, so there is no way to support it since
> it can't be installed. It isn't useful to have non-functioning OS

It's not a given thing that it can't be installed. Actually, except
for corner cases ALL the bits you need should be in rootfs and hwpack
combined.

For me all hwpack/rootfs that don't have all the bits are actually
BUGGY and I would like to kill online support from lmc just for the
sake to ensure that our hwpacks/rootfs really have everything.


> binaries on releases.linaro.org, so we should either delete them/move
> them to an archive location or perhaps put them behind a warning page.
> We could use BUILDINFO.txt to implement the warning.

That's an independent discussion.

Right now LMC is buggy as it cannot install stuff without the upstream
archives still being there. Let's fix that first and then go and talk
about a policy how to phase out old stuff (even though right now I
believe all releases should stay around forever).

>

> Our CI jobs for image tools only go back to Linaro 11.06. I don't know
> when our releases switched to use Ubuntu 11.04 but it would be around
> then. We could try going back further, but it may only get us 6 months
> of testing a release that very few people are using.

Yes, please go back to the oldest we have, treat them as bugs and
systematically discuss case by case if we really don't support it.

>
> Binaries from ports.ubuntu.com will vanish after their support window
> has expired, so it seems likely that 11.04 and 11.10 based images will
> be unusable in a years time.

As from above: our hwpacks should have everything they need in them.
If not, its a hwpack bug and we want to know about them (through lmc
hwpack-create and create failing unless you pass
--download-missing-anyway or something).

>
> James



-- 
Alexander Sack
Director, Linaro Platform Engineering
http://www.linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [resend] Timer broadcast question

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 02/19/2013 07:10 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> I am working on identifying the different wakeup sources from the
>> interrupts and I have a question regarding the timer broadcast.
>>
>> The broadcast timer is setup to the next event and that will wake up any
>> idle cpu belonging to the "broadcast cpumask", right ?
>>
>> The cpu which has been woken up will look for each cpu the next-event
>> and send an IPI to wake it up.
>>  
>> Although, it is possible the sender of this IPI may not be concerned by
>> the timer expiration and has been woken up just for sending the IPI, right ?
> 
> Correct.
>  
>> If this is correct, is it possible to setup the timer irq affinity to a
>> cpu which will be concerned by the timer expiration ? so we prevent an
>> unnecessary wake up for a cpu.
> 
> It is possible, but we never implemented it.
> 
> If we go there, we want to make that conditional on a property flag,
> because some interrupt controllers especially on x86 only allow to
> move the affinity from interrupt context, which is pointless.

Thanks Thomas for your quick answer. I will write a RFC patchset.

  -- Daniel

-- 
  Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:   Facebook |
 Twitter |
 Blog


___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

[resend] Timer broadcast question

[Daniel Lezcano]

Hi,

I am working on identifying the different wakeup sources from the
interrupts and I have a question regarding the timer broadcast.

The broadcast timer is setup to the next event and that will wake up any
idle cpu belonging to the "broadcast cpumask", right ?

The cpu which has been woken up will look for each cpu the next-event
and send an IPI to wake it up.

Although, it is possible the sender of this IPI may not be concerned by
the timer expiration and has been woken up just for sending the IPI, right ?

If this is correct, is it possible to setup the timer irq affinity to a
cpu which will be concerned by the timer expiration ? so we prevent an
unnecessary wake up for a cpu.

For example, let's say we have a 2 cpus system.

cpu0, cpu1 are idle

The next event is for cpu1 but cpu0 is wake up by the broadcast timer,
after checking it has nothing to do except send a IPI_TIMER to cpu1 and
then goes to idle again.

Wouldn't be worth to set the broadcast timer affinity to cpu1, so cpu0
is not wake up ?

Did I missed something or does it sound correct ?

Thanks
  -- Daniel



-- 
  Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:   Facebook |
 Twitter |
 Blog


___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Question about the 'official' Linaro release kernel configuration method

[Jon Medhurst (Tixy)]

I've added the linaro-dev list to the cc as I think my answer is useful
for everyone working with Linaro's kernels...

On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 21:54 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2013 8:50 PM, "Dietmar Eggemann" 
> wrote:
> >
> > there're a couple of config switches for android and ubuntu:
> >
> > There are 9 config switches for andoid and 4 for ubuntu.
> >
> > $ ./scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf
> > linaro/configs/vexpress.conf linaro/configs/big-LITTLE-MP.conf
> > linaro/configs/ubuntu-minimal.conf | grep "^Actual value" | wc -l
> >
> > $ ./scripts/kconfig/merge_config.sh linaro/configs/linaro-base.conf
> > linaro/configs/vexpress.conf linaro/configs/big-LITTLE-MP.conf
> > linaro/configs/android.conf | grep "^Actual value" | wc -l
> >
> > which have a problem:
> >
> > Value requested for CONFIG_FOO not in final .config
> > Requested value:  # CONFIG_FOO is not set
> > Actual value:
> >
> > Value requested for CONFIG_BAR not in final
> > .config
> > Requested value:  CONFIG_BAR=y
> > Actual value: # CONFIG_BAR is not set
> >
> > My question is: Is there anybody making sure that those config
> fragments
> > stay in sync with the release?

There isn't any one person making sure things stay in sync, though
occasionally I have a look; if you think there is a bug, you should let
me know or raise a bug in Launchpad (linaro-android or linaro-ubuntu
projects?).

Note however, there are always going to be warnings when building a
kernel config from a set of config fragments. The usual valid reasons
are:

1. The platform enables a feature which isn't supported by a particular
hardware device. E.g. Android has USB_G_ANDROID ("Android Composite
Gadget") which requires the device to support USB OTG, which some don't
(like Versatile Express).

2. The device wants to override a platform or Linaro default for
whatever reason.

3. We have redundant options there to avoid bugs and wasted effort when
people tweak other options.


For the specific case of the warnings we get for vexpress, I wouldn't
consider any of them to be bugs. These are...

1. For CONFIG_OABI_COMPAT, see commit message for when I added this:
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=kernel/configs.git;a=commit;h=e1fccb9e6bf7dc077e0b8367c957e8df52cb8611

2. For CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND we are deliberately
overriding the defaults in earlier platform configs. (That's part of the
usecase for config fragments, later, more specific config fragments
overriding earlier more generic ones.)

3. CONFIG_ENABLE_DEFAULT_TRACERS is there so Gator works. The fact that
the recent addition of CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER in linaro-base.conf causes
GENERIC_TRACER to be selected and disable ENABLE_DEFAULT_TRACERS (as
it's a subset of tracing) is unfortunate, but if we removed
ENABLE_DEFAULT_TRACERS then everything would break if anyone decided
that as function tracer bloats the kernel and make it slower we should
disable it again.

4. CONFIG_VEXPRESS_TC2_CPUIDLE is there so the old TC2 power management
drivers work should I or someone else decided to drop the new drivers
from there tree. (Unlikely, and once the driver code if properly
consolidated I'll remove this old config option).

5. The rest of the warnings are Android options which are set but
require features (like runtime power management or USB OTG) which aren't
actually enabled on vexpress.


Cheers

-- 
Tixy





___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[James Tunnicliffe]

On 19 February 2013 16:08, Alexander Sack  wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:53 PM, James Tunnicliffe
>  wrote:
>> Good point! I would be pleasantly surprised if an image + hwpack from
>> 2010 worked with our current tools.
>
> Actually, I am surprised if they do not work.
>
> Our official promise on lit has always been that:
>  1. all hwpacks and rootfs ever produced before a lmc release will
> work with that lmc
>  2. lmc will work well on most recent Ubuntu release as well as on all
> Ubuntu LTS still supported by Canonical
>
> So moving forward let's do this:
>  + find out if latest lmc works with the hwpack/rootfs stuff above -
> maybe it is all good actually - the wiki instructions refer to an old
> lmc version.
>  + ensure that we have hwpack rootfs version as old as the above in our CI
>  + use this opportunity to review if our CI tests have other gaps that
> we need to fill to know whether we are green wrt 1. and 2. above
>  + fix failures including removing online requirement when they come up.
>
> Guess a blueprint about "lmc legacy support investigation and
> resurrection" might be the way to go.

Interesting. We have had a blueprint about dropping Hardware Pack v1
support ready to go for a while. There is a lot of "if v1, else" code
in Linaro Image Tools that we would like to get rid of.

In the original case we have an image based on an unsupported Ubuntu
version, which no longer has packages on
http://ports.ubuntu.com/dists/, so there is no way to support it since
it can't be installed. It isn't useful to have non-functioning OS
binaries on releases.linaro.org, so we should either delete them/move
them to an archive location or perhaps put them behind a warning page.
We could use BUILDINFO.txt to implement the warning.

Our CI jobs for image tools only go back to Linaro 11.06. I don't know
when our releases switched to use Ubuntu 11.04 but it would be around
then. We could try going back further, but it may only get us 6 months
of testing a release that very few people are using.

Binaries from ports.ubuntu.com will vanish after their support window
has expired, so it seems likely that 11.04 and 11.10 based images will
be unusable in a years time.

James

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[Alexander Sack]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:53 PM, James Tunnicliffe
 wrote:
> Good point! I would be pleasantly surprised if an image + hwpack from
> 2010 worked with our current tools.

Actually, I am surprised if they do not work.

Our official promise on lit has always been that:
 1. all hwpacks and rootfs ever produced before a lmc release will
work with that lmc
 2. lmc will work well on most recent Ubuntu release as well as on all
Ubuntu LTS still supported by Canonical

So moving forward let's do this:
 + find out if latest lmc works with the hwpack/rootfs stuff above -
maybe it is all good actually - the wiki instructions refer to an old
lmc version.
 + ensure that we have hwpack rootfs version as old as the above in our CI
 + use this opportunity to review if our CI tests have other gaps that
we need to fill to know whether we are green wrt 1. and 2. above
 + fix failures including removing online requirement when they come up.

Guess a blueprint about "lmc legacy support investigation and
resurrection" might be the way to go.

Thanks!

>
> James
>
> On 19 February 2013 12:02, Alexander Sack  wrote:
>> Hmm.
>>
>> I think you are trying to install a very, very old hardware pack based
>> off "maverick" - for which the ubuntu repositories have been
>> deleted...
>>
>> You might have out of luck if that hwpack really needs packages from
>> the archives, but if you are lucky it has everything it needs included
>> and you might be able to hack around the fact that lmc bails out...
>>
>> CCing a few folks to see if they have an idea on how to hack/workaround.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Amar Shankar
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I am trying to create beagle_sd.img for beagle board using
>>> linaro-media-create, by referring the procedure in
>>> http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/tianocore/index.php?title=BeagleBoardPkg#How_to_build_UEFI_for_the_BeagleBoard
>>>
>>> But I am getting the below error.
>>> Could someone please help resolve the issue.
>>>
>>> kiran@kiran-desktop:~/beagle_image$ sudo linaro-media-create --image_file
>>> beagle_sd.img --dev beagle --binary linaro-m-headless-tar-20101101-0.tar.gz
>>> --hwpack hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz
>>> /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/argparse.py:1576: DeprecationWarning: The
>>> "version" argument to ArgumentParser is deprecated. Please use
>>> "add_argument(..., action='version', version="N", ...)" instead
>>> """instead""", DeprecationWarning)
>>> Searching correct rootfs path
>>> 
>>> Installing (linaro-hwpack-install)
>>> hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz in target rootfs.
>>> Unpacking hardware pack ...Done
>>> Updating apt package lists ...
>>> Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
>>> Ign filetmp/tmp.PybN7nuXq3/unpacked/pkgs/ ./ Translation-en
>>> Ign file: ./ Release
>>> Ign file: ./ Packages
>>> Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release.gpg [316B]
>>> Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/overlay/ubuntu/
>>> maverick/main Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release.gpg
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/main Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/universe Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release.gpg
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/main Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/universe Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release.gpg
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/main Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/universe Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release.gpg
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/main Translation-en
>>> Get:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release [9762B]
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/universe Translation-en
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release
>>> Get:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick/main armel Packages [11.7kB]
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel
>>> Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel
>>> Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel
>>> Packages/DiffIndex
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
>>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
>>> Ign http://po

Re: Power aware scheduler - DVFS development question

[Vincent Guittot]

On 19 February 2013 14:50, Lukasz Majewski  wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
>> On 5 February 2013 08:05, Lukasz Majewski 
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Vincent,
>> >
>> >> Hi Lukasz,
>> >>
>> >> I still need to get figures for the cover letter of the V3 of
>> >> packing small tasks patches. Nevertheless, the patches series is
>> >> available here:
>> >> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vingu/kernel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/sched-pack-small-tasks-v3
>> >>
>> >
>> > Thanks for sharing code. I will look to it (and test) and provide
>> > feedback.
>> >
>>
>> Hi Lucasz,
>>
>> I have just found that a part of the 1st patch of packing small tasks
>> (Revert "sched: Introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED dependency for
>> load-tracking") has disappeared  during my rebase and push on my git
>> tree. The consequence is that the branch sched-pack-small-tasks-v3
>> only working if CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED is set in your kernel. I have
>> pushed a new branch with the fixed
>> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vingu/kernel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/sched-pack-small-tasks-v3-fixed
>>
>
Hi Lucasz,

> I've applied the code to our development 3.8 kernel. It seems to work.
>

great!

> On the other hand I'm wondering about the best set of tests.
>
> Currently, for basic tests I'm using preempt's-rt cyclic test suite
> (./cyclictest -S) with various parameters. It is good enough to see
> long therm system stability, but more fine grained code would be nice.
>
> On the linaro website and some big.LITTLE presentation I've found
> information about the linsched tool used by Linaro for validation.
>
> The newest one which I've found is (LinSched for v3.3-rc7 ->
> linsched-alpha):
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/486635/
>
> Apparently, it needs some porting to run with v3.8 linux kernel, but I'm
> optimistic :-)

yes, it's not a simple port regarding the lot of change in the
scheduler code since v3.3

>
> Do you use the same version?

No, I don't use linsched but a TC2 versatile board.

IIRC, Morten has already used linsched but he has switched to real HW too

> Shall I use any special tests?

I mainly use cyclictest and sysbench to make functional tests on the
scheduler behavior and then i'm using real use case like mp3 and web
browsing

>
> Thanks in advance,
> Lukasz
>
> p.s. I've poked around the linaro website and I didn't find the
> linsched code for download. Is there a plan to make it available for
> download?

AFAICT, we don't have special linsched version but we use the same
than you point out above

Regards,
Vincent

>
>>
>> >> I will send the patchset to LKML as soon as I will have got all
>> >> figures of my tests on various platform
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Vincent
>> >>
>> >> On 30 January 2013 10:23, Lukasz Majewski 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Vincent,
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for a very fast response.
>> >> >
>> >> >> On 30 January 2013 09:35, Lukasz Majewski
>> >> >>  wrote:
>> >> >> > Dear All,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I'd like to ask about the power aware scheduler development:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-power-kernel/+spec/power-aware-
>> >> >> > scheduler
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Why I'm interested?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I'd like to test and further develop methods to put CPU to
>> >> >> > IDLE or changing its operating frequency. I'm especially
>> >> >> > interested in packing  as much as possible tasks to a CPU and
>> >> >> > put the other one to deep idle (RFTS - policy). I'm also
>> >> >> > curious how aggressive SCHED_POLICY_POWERSAVING is going to
>> >> >> > be? (are there any special requirements)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm going to release a v3 of packing small tasks patches this
>> >> >> week
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > In the above page at the "Work items 2013.01" section states
>> >> >> > that there is a work TODO in the "max_power and
>> >> >> > current_power" for DVFS.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Could you share code (if available) and plans for this
>> >> >> > development?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This step of the blueprint is not already done but there are RFC
>> >> >> patch from Chris Redpath about frequency scaling invariance that
>> >> >> could interest you
>> >> >> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=arm/big.LITTLE/mp.git;a=commit;h=6af10694b3a52f47f6814480e48993b0a9cfa4ef
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Vincent
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I've looked to the:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > git://git.linaro.org/arm/big.LITTLE/mp.git tree (branch:
>> >> >> > power-aware- scheduling-v4), but didn't find the power related
>> >> >> > code (especially DVFS).
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Probably I've looked at wrong place, so any guidance would be
>> >> >> > appreciate.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > As a side question:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On the linaro-dev mailing list there are some patches for
>> >> >> > tuning cpufreq governor. Is there any roadmap for this effort?
>> >> >> >
>> 

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[James Tunnicliffe]

Good point! I would be pleasantly surprised if an image + hwpack from
2010 worked with our current tools.

James

On 19 February 2013 12:02, Alexander Sack  wrote:
> Hmm.
>
> I think you are trying to install a very, very old hardware pack based
> off "maverick" - for which the ubuntu repositories have been
> deleted...
>
> You might have out of luck if that hwpack really needs packages from
> the archives, but if you are lucky it has everything it needs included
> and you might be able to hack around the fact that lmc bails out...
>
> CCing a few folks to see if they have an idea on how to hack/workaround.
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Amar Shankar
>  wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I am trying to create beagle_sd.img for beagle board using
>> linaro-media-create, by referring the procedure in
>> http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/tianocore/index.php?title=BeagleBoardPkg#How_to_build_UEFI_for_the_BeagleBoard
>>
>> But I am getting the below error.
>> Could someone please help resolve the issue.
>>
>> kiran@kiran-desktop:~/beagle_image$ sudo linaro-media-create --image_file
>> beagle_sd.img --dev beagle --binary linaro-m-headless-tar-20101101-0.tar.gz
>> --hwpack hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz
>> /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/argparse.py:1576: DeprecationWarning: The
>> "version" argument to ArgumentParser is deprecated. Please use
>> "add_argument(..., action='version', version="N", ...)" instead
>> """instead""", DeprecationWarning)
>> Searching correct rootfs path
>> 
>> Installing (linaro-hwpack-install)
>> hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz in target rootfs.
>> Unpacking hardware pack ...Done
>> Updating apt package lists ...
>> Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
>> Ign filetmp/tmp.PybN7nuXq3/unpacked/pkgs/ ./ Translation-en
>> Ign file: ./ Release
>> Ign file: ./ Packages
>> Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release.gpg [316B]
>> Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/overlay/ubuntu/
>> maverick/main Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release.gpg
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/main Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/universe Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release.gpg
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/main Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/universe Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release.gpg
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/main Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/universe Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release.gpg
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/main Translation-en
>> Get:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release [9762B]
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/universe Translation-en
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release
>> Get:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick/main armel Packages [11.7kB]
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel
>> Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel
>> Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel
>> Packages/DiffIndex
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
>> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
>> 404 Not Found
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
>> 404 Not Found
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
>> 404 Not Found
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
>> 404 Not Found
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
>> 404 Not Found
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
>> 404 Not Found
>> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/mai

Re: Power aware scheduler - DVFS development question

[Lukasz Majewski]

Hi Vincent,

> On 5 February 2013 08:05, Lukasz Majewski 
> wrote:
> > Hi Vincent,
> >
> >> Hi Lukasz,
> >>
> >> I still need to get figures for the cover letter of the V3 of
> >> packing small tasks patches. Nevertheless, the patches series is
> >> available here:
> >> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vingu/kernel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/sched-pack-small-tasks-v3
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for sharing code. I will look to it (and test) and provide
> > feedback.
> >
> 
> Hi Lucasz,
> 
> I have just found that a part of the 1st patch of packing small tasks
> (Revert "sched: Introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED dependency for
> load-tracking") has disappeared  during my rebase and push on my git
> tree. The consequence is that the branch sched-pack-small-tasks-v3
> only working if CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED is set in your kernel. I have
> pushed a new branch with the fixed
> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/vingu/kernel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/sched-pack-small-tasks-v3-fixed
> 

I've applied the code to our development 3.8 kernel. It seems to work.

On the other hand I'm wondering about the best set of tests. 

Currently, for basic tests I'm using preempt's-rt cyclic test suite
(./cyclictest -S) with various parameters. It is good enough to see
long therm system stability, but more fine grained code would be nice.

On the linaro website and some big.LITTLE presentation I've found
information about the linsched tool used by Linaro for validation.

The newest one which I've found is (LinSched for v3.3-rc7 ->
linsched-alpha):

http://lwn.net/Articles/486635/

Apparently, it needs some porting to run with v3.8 linux kernel, but I'm
optimistic :-)

Do you use the same version?
Shall I use any special tests?

Thanks in advance,
Lukasz

p.s. I've poked around the linaro website and I didn't find the
linsched code for download. Is there a plan to make it available for
download?  

> 
> >> I will send the patchset to LKML as soon as I will have got all
> >> figures of my tests on various platform
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Vincent
> >>
> >> On 30 January 2013 10:23, Lukasz Majewski 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Vincent,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for a very fast response.
> >> >
> >> >> On 30 January 2013 09:35, Lukasz Majewski
> >> >>  wrote:
> >> >> > Dear All,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'd like to ask about the power aware scheduler development:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/linaro-power-kernel/+spec/power-aware-
> >> >> > scheduler
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Why I'm interested?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'd like to test and further develop methods to put CPU to
> >> >> > IDLE or changing its operating frequency. I'm especially
> >> >> > interested in packing  as much as possible tasks to a CPU and
> >> >> > put the other one to deep idle (RFTS - policy). I'm also
> >> >> > curious how aggressive SCHED_POLICY_POWERSAVING is going to
> >> >> > be? (are there any special requirements)
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm going to release a v3 of packing small tasks patches this
> >> >> week
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In the above page at the "Work items 2013.01" section states
> >> >> > that there is a work TODO in the "max_power and
> >> >> > current_power" for DVFS.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Could you share code (if available) and plans for this
> >> >> > development?
> >> >>
> >> >> This step of the blueprint is not already done but there are RFC
> >> >> patch from Chris Redpath about frequency scaling invariance that
> >> >> could interest you
> >> >> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=arm/big.LITTLE/mp.git;a=commit;h=6af10694b3a52f47f6814480e48993b0a9cfa4ef
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Vincent
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I've looked to the:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > git://git.linaro.org/arm/big.LITTLE/mp.git tree (branch:
> >> >> > power-aware- scheduling-v4), but didn't find the power related
> >> >> > code (especially DVFS).
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Probably I've looked at wrong place, so any guidance would be
> >> >> > appreciate.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As a side question:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On the linaro-dev mailing list there are some patches for
> >> >> > tuning cpufreq governor. Is there any roadmap for this effort?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Best regards,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Lukasz Majewski
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Samsung R&D Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best regards,
> >> >
> >> > Lukasz Majewski
> >> >
> >> > Samsung R&D Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Lukasz Majewski
> >
> > Samsung R&D Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group



-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung R&D Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[Alexander Sack]

Hmm.

I think you are trying to install a very, very old hardware pack based
off "maverick" - for which the ubuntu repositories have been
deleted...

You might have out of luck if that hwpack really needs packages from
the archives, but if you are lucky it has everything it needs included
and you might be able to hack around the fact that lmc bails out...

CCing a few folks to see if they have an idea on how to hack/workaround.

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Amar Shankar
 wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am trying to create beagle_sd.img for beagle board using
> linaro-media-create, by referring the procedure in
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/tianocore/index.php?title=BeagleBoardPkg#How_to_build_UEFI_for_the_BeagleBoard
>
> But I am getting the below error.
> Could someone please help resolve the issue.
>
> kiran@kiran-desktop:~/beagle_image$ sudo linaro-media-create --image_file
> beagle_sd.img --dev beagle --binary linaro-m-headless-tar-20101101-0.tar.gz
> --hwpack hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz
> /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/argparse.py:1576: DeprecationWarning: The
> "version" argument to ArgumentParser is deprecated. Please use
> "add_argument(..., action='version', version="N", ...)" instead
> """instead""", DeprecationWarning)
> Searching correct rootfs path
> 
> Installing (linaro-hwpack-install)
> hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz in target rootfs.
> Unpacking hardware pack ...Done
> Updating apt package lists ...
> Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
> Ign filetmp/tmp.PybN7nuXq3/unpacked/pkgs/ ./ Translation-en
> Ign file: ./ Release
> Ign file: ./ Packages
> Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release.gpg [316B]
> Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/overlay/ubuntu/
> maverick/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/main Translation-en
> Get:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release [9762B]
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release
> Get:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick/main armel Packages [11.7kB]
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel P

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[Dave Pigott]

As James said, Anything from the LTS (12.04 - Precise) onwards.

Dave

On 19 Feb 2013, at 10:02, Amar Shankar  
wrote:

> No

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: fix init NOHZ_IDLE flag

[Vincent Guittot]

On 19 February 2013 11:29, Vincent Guittot  wrote:
> On 18 February 2013 16:40, Frederic Weisbecker  wrote:
>> 2013/2/18 Vincent Guittot :
>>> On 18 February 2013 15:38, Frederic Weisbecker  wrote:
 I pasted the original at: http://pastebin.com/DMm5U8J8
>>>
>>> We can clear the idle flag only in the nohz_kick_needed which will not
>>> be called if the sched_domain is NULL so the sequence will be
>>>
>>> = CPU 0 == CPU 1=
>>>
>>> detach_and_destroy_domain {
>>> rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, NULL);
>>> }
>>>
>>> dom = new_domain(...) {
>>>  nr_cpus_busy = 0;
>>>  set_idle(CPU 1);
>>> }
>>> dom =
>>> rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>>> //dom == NULL, return
>>>
>>> rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, dom);
>>>
>>> dom =
>>> rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>>> //dom != NULL,
>>> nohz_kick_needed {
>>>
>>> set_idle(CPU 1)
>>>dom
>>> = rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>>>
>>> //dec nr_cpus_busy,
>>> }
>>>
>>> Vincent
>>
>> Ok but CPU 0 can assign NULL to the domain of cpu1 while CPU 1 is
>> already in the middle of nohz_kick_needed().
>
> Yes nothing prevents the sequence below to occur
>
> = CPU 0 == CPU 1=
> dom =
> rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
> //dom != NULL
> detach_and_destroy_domain {
> rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, NULL);
> }
>
> dom = new_domain(...) {
>  nr_cpus_busy = 0;
>  //nr_cpus_busy in the new_dom
>  set_idle(CPU 1);
> }
> nohz_kick_needed {
>  clear_idle(CPU 1)
>  dom =
> rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>
> //cpu1_dom == old_dom
>  inc nr_cpus_busy,
>
> //nr_cpus_busy in the old_dom
> }
>
> rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, dom);
> //cpu1_dom == new_dom

The sequence above is not correct in addition to become unreadable
after going through gmail

The correct and readable version
https://pastebin.linaro.org/1750/

Vincent

>
> I'm not sure that this can happen in practice because CPU1 is in
> interrupt handler but we don't have any mechanism to prevent the
> sequence.
>
> The NULL sched_domain can be used to detect this situation and the
> set_cpu_sd_state_busy function can be modified like below
>
> inline void set_cpu_sd_state_busy
>  {
> struct sched_domain *sd;
> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> +   int clear = 0;
>
> if (!test_bit(NOHZ_IDLE, nohz_flags(cpu)))
> return;
> -   clear_bit(NOHZ_IDLE, nohz_flags(cpu));
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
> atomic_inc(&sd->groups->sgp->nr_busy_cpus);
> +   clear = 1;
> }
> rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> +   if (likely(clear))
> +   clear_bit(NOHZ_IDLE, nohz_flags(cpu));
>  }
>
> The NOHZ_IDLE flag will not be clear if we have a NULL sched_domain
> attached to the CPU.
> With this implementation, we still don't need to get the sched_domain
> for testing the NOHZ_IDLE flag which occurs each time CPU becomes idle
>
> The patch 2 become useless
>
> Vincent

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] sched: fix init NOHZ_IDLE flag

[Vincent Guittot]

On 18 February 2013 16:40, Frederic Weisbecker  wrote:
> 2013/2/18 Vincent Guittot :
>> On 18 February 2013 15:38, Frederic Weisbecker  wrote:
>>> I pasted the original at: http://pastebin.com/DMm5U8J8
>>
>> We can clear the idle flag only in the nohz_kick_needed which will not
>> be called if the sched_domain is NULL so the sequence will be
>>
>> = CPU 0 == CPU 1=
>>
>> detach_and_destroy_domain {
>> rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, NULL);
>> }
>>
>> dom = new_domain(...) {
>>  nr_cpus_busy = 0;
>>  set_idle(CPU 1);
>> }
>> dom =
>> rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>> //dom == NULL, return
>>
>> rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, dom);
>>
>> dom =
>> rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>> //dom != NULL,
>> nohz_kick_needed {
>>
>> set_idle(CPU 1)
>>dom
>> = rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
>>
>> //dec nr_cpus_busy,
>> }
>>
>> Vincent
>
> Ok but CPU 0 can assign NULL to the domain of cpu1 while CPU 1 is
> already in the middle of nohz_kick_needed().

Yes nothing prevents the sequence below to occur

= CPU 0 == CPU 1=
dom =
rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)
//dom != NULL
detach_and_destroy_domain {
rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, NULL);
}

dom = new_domain(...) {
 nr_cpus_busy = 0;
 //nr_cpus_busy in the new_dom
 set_idle(CPU 1);
}
nohz_kick_needed {
 clear_idle(CPU 1)
 dom =
rcu_dereference(cpu1_dom)

//cpu1_dom == old_dom
 inc nr_cpus_busy,

//nr_cpus_busy in the old_dom
}

rcu_assign_pointer(cpu1_dom, dom);
//cpu1_dom == new_dom

I'm not sure that this can happen in practice because CPU1 is in
interrupt handler but we don't have any mechanism to prevent the
sequence.

The NULL sched_domain can be used to detect this situation and the
set_cpu_sd_state_busy function can be modified like below

inline void set_cpu_sd_state_busy
 {
struct sched_domain *sd;
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+   int clear = 0;

if (!test_bit(NOHZ_IDLE, nohz_flags(cpu)))
return;
-   clear_bit(NOHZ_IDLE, nohz_flags(cpu));

rcu_read_lock();
for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
atomic_inc(&sd->groups->sgp->nr_busy_cpus);
+   clear = 1;
}
rcu_read_unlock();
+
+   if (likely(clear))
+   clear_bit(NOHZ_IDLE, nohz_flags(cpu));
 }

The NOHZ_IDLE flag will not be clear if we have a NULL sched_domain
attached to the CPU.
With this implementation, we still don't need to get the sched_domain
for testing the NOHZ_IDLE flag which occurs each time CPU becomes idle

The patch 2 become useless

Vincent

___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev

RE: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[Amar Shankar]

No, its lucid (Ubuntu 10.04).
Could you please let me know which Ubuntu version do we need to use for this?

Regards,
Amar

From: Dave Pigott [dave.pig...@linaro.org]
Sent: 19 February, 2013 3:13 PM
To: Amar Shankar
Cc: linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org; Prasad Raju
Subject: Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

Just a thought: It looks to me to be down to using 10.10 (Maverick) - I'm not 
sure l-m-c supports that far back, but I may be wrong.

On 19 Feb 2013, at 05:31, Amar Shankar 
mailto:amar.shan...@infotech-enterprises.com>>
 wrote:

Hi All,

I am trying to create beagle_sd.img for beagle board using linaro-media-create, 
by referring the procedure in 
http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/tianocore/index.php?title=BeagleBoardPkg#How_to_build_UEFI_for_the_BeagleBoard

But I am getting the below error.
Could someone please help resolve the issue.

kiran@kiran-desktop:~/beagle_image$ sudo linaro-media-create --image_file 
beagle_sd.img --dev beagle --binary linaro-m-headless-tar-20101101-0.tar.gz 
--hwpack hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz
/usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/argparse.py:1576: DeprecationWarning: The 
"version" argument to ArgumentParser is deprecated. Please use 
"add_argument(..., action='version', version="N", ...)" instead
"""instead""", DeprecationWarning)
Searching correct rootfs path

Installing (linaro-hwpack-install) 
hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz in target rootfs.
Unpacking hardware pack ...Done
Updating apt package lists ...
Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
Ign filetmp/tmp.PybN7nuXq3/unpacked/pkgs/ ./ Translation-en
Ign file: ./ Release
Ign file: ./ Packages
Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release.gpg [316B]
Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/overlay/ubuntu/ maverick/main 
Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release.gpg
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/main Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/universe Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release.gpg
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/main Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/universe Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release.gpg
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/main Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/universe Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release.gpg
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/main Translation-en
Get:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release [9762B]
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/universe Translation-en
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release
Get:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick/main armel Packages [11.7kB]
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
404 Not Found
Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
404 Not Found
Fetched 21.8kB in 2s (9070B/

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[James Tunnicliffe]

Yea, was about to say the same thing. You need to be running the
latest Ubuntu release or the latest LTS release or it is likely that
Linaro Image Tools won't work.

James

On 19 February 2013 09:43, Dave Pigott  wrote:
> Just a thought: It looks to me to be down to using 10.10 (Maverick) - I'm
> not sure l-m-c supports that far back, but I may be wrong.
>
> On 19 Feb 2013, at 05:31, Amar Shankar
>  wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am trying to create beagle_sd.img for beagle board using
> linaro-media-create, by referring the procedure in
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/tianocore/index.php?title=BeagleBoardPkg#How_to_build_UEFI_for_the_BeagleBoard
>
> But I am getting the below error.
> Could someone please help resolve the issue.
>
> kiran@kiran-desktop:~/beagle_image$ sudo linaro-media-create --image_file
> beagle_sd.img --dev beagle --binary linaro-m-headless-tar-20101101-0.tar.gz
> --hwpack hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz
> /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/argparse.py:1576: DeprecationWarning: The
> "version" argument to ArgumentParser is deprecated. Please use
> "add_argument(..., action='version', version="N", ...)" instead
> """instead""", DeprecationWarning)
> Searching correct rootfs path
> 
> Installing (linaro-hwpack-install)
> hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz in target rootfs.
> Unpacking hardware pack ...Done
> Updating apt package lists ...
> Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
> Ign filetmp/tmp.PybN7nuXq3/unpacked/pkgs/ ./ Translation-en
> Ign file: ./ Release
> Ign file: ./ Packages
> Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release.gpg [316B]
> Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/overlay/ubuntu/
> maverick/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/main Translation-en
> Get:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release [9762B]
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release
> Get:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick/main armel Packages [11.7kB]
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Fetched 21.8kB in 2s (9070B/s)
> W: Failed to fet

Re: Failure to generate beagle_sd.img using linaro-media-create

[Dave Pigott]

Just a thought: It looks to me to be down to using 10.10 (Maverick) - I'm not 
sure l-m-c supports that far back, but I may be wrong.

On 19 Feb 2013, at 05:31, Amar Shankar  
wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> I am trying to create beagle_sd.img for beagle board using 
> linaro-media-create, by referring the procedure in 
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/tianocore/index.php?title=BeagleBoardPkg#How_to_build_UEFI_for_the_BeagleBoard
> 
> But I am getting the below error.
> Could someone please help resolve the issue.
> 
> kiran@kiran-desktop:~/beagle_image$ sudo linaro-media-create --image_file 
> beagle_sd.img --dev beagle --binary linaro-m-headless-tar-20101101-0.tar.gz 
> --hwpack hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz
> /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/argparse.py:1576: DeprecationWarning: The 
> "version" argument to ArgumentParser is deprecated. Please use 
> "add_argument(..., action='version', version="N", ...)" instead
> """instead""", DeprecationWarning)
> Searching correct rootfs path
> 
> Installing (linaro-hwpack-install) 
> hwpack_linaro-omap3_20101109-1_armel_supported.tar.gz in target rootfs.
> Unpacking hardware pack ...Done
> Updating apt package lists ...
> Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
> Ign filetmp/tmp.PybN7nuXq3/unpacked/pkgs/ ./ Translation-en
> Ign file: ./ Release
> Ign file: ./ Packages
> Get:1 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release.gpg [316B]
> Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net/linaro-maintainers/overlay/ubuntu/ maverick/main 
> Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-security/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/main Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-updates/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release.gpg
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/main Translation-en
> Get:2 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick Release [9762B]
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com/ maverick-proposed/universe Translation-en
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security Release
> Get:3 http://ppa.launchpad.net maverick/main armel Packages [11.7kB]
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed Release
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel 
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel 
> Packages/DiffIndex
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
> Ign http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-security/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-updates/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/main armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Err http://ports.ubuntu.com maverick-proposed/universe armel Packages
> 404 Not Found
> Fetched 21.8kB in 2s (9070B/s)
> W: Failed to fetch 
> http://ports.ubuntu.com/dists/maverick/main/binary-armel/Packages.gz 404 Not 
> Found
> 
> W: Failed to fetch 
> http://ports.ubuntu.com/dists/maverick/universe/binary-armel/Packages.gz 404 
> Not Found
> 
> W: