to track. This should
perhaps be referred to as a publicly exposed API then. Still, it would
greatly help us to have this version number available as a numeric value.
Thanks,
Mathieu
Ben.
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ
-Series-ThinkPad-Laptops/x230-SATA-errors-with-180GB-Intel-520-SSD-under-heavy-write-load/m-p/1068147/highlight/false#M48401
-
http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/T400-T500-and-newer-T-series/T430s-Intel-SSD-520-180GB-issue/m-p/1070549#M76964
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
-by: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Cheers,
Rusty.
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
be the closest one we have now, although we might want to be
more specific than that.
Thanks,
Mathieu
Thanks,
Rusty.
PS. Can't see how this related to lockdep either...
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
* Richard Mortimer (ri...@oldelvet.org.uk) wrote:
On 21/01/2011 22:50, Richard Mortimer wrote:
On 21/01/2011 20:40, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
* Richard Mortimer (ri...@oldelvet.org.uk) wrote:
Thanks for the info! At first glance, it does not seem to contradict my
findings. When you find
* Richard Mortimer (ri...@oldelvet.org.uk) wrote:
On 21/01/2011 00:04, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyersmathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:33:39 -0500
So I guess we go for the following. Is it verbose enough
* Mathieu Desnoyers (mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com) wrote:
* Richard Mortimer (ri...@oldelvet.org.uk) wrote:
[...]
I'm also getting a lot of Kernel unaligned access errors from the
kernel. I don't know if they are related to this or not and this is the
first time that I personally have
tracing in your tests, as I think the unaligned access only
happens when accessing the struct tracepoint fields below the int state field.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:33:39 -0500
So I guess we go for the following. Is it verbose enough ?
It's got all of the details that seem to matter, thanks.
I'm letting people following
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:08:45 -0500
The following works fine for me now. Comments are welcome.
Thanks for doing this work Mathieu.
- No aligned() type attribute nor variable attribute
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:08:45 -0500
- No aligned() type attribute nor variable attribute. I get a crash on
x86_64
(NULL pointer exception when executing __trace_add_event_call, the 5th
that).
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org
PERF_MAX_TRACE_SIZE 2048
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org
seems to support having both specified. I think this would provide the kind
of alignment guarantees we really need here: both specifying the minimum _and_
maximum alignment.
Thoughts ?
Mathieu
Sam
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http
* Steven Rostedt (rost...@goodmis.org) wrote:
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 11:15 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
* Steven Rostedt (rost...@goodmis.org) wrote:
After applying David's remove align patch, I got it to boot on x86_64
with the following two patches. I thought just adding the align
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:33:26 -0500
I'm still unsure that __long_long_aligned is needed over __long_aligned
though.
AFAIK, the only requirement we have for, e.g. tracepoints, is to align
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:20:53 -0500
Now what I'm discussing with David Miller is if creating a
__long_packed_aligned
and using it for *both* type and variable alignment would
system can generate an unaligned access trap for an
access to a 64-bit variable aligned on 32-bit, given that there is, by
definition, no 64-bit memory accesses available on the architecture ?
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http
* David Miller (da...@davemloft.net) wrote:
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:13:27 -0500
Hrm, I'd like to see what kind of ill-conceived 32-bit architecture would
generate a unaligned access for a 32-bit aligned u64. Do you have examples
trap.
Ah! There is always an odd case ;) Thanks!
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
the beginning of the section is
aligned on pointer size.
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
---
include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h | 19 ++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
* Steven Rostedt (rost...@goodmis.org) wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 13:16 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 12:33 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 11:46 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
Also align TRACE_PRINTKS on 8 bytes to make sure the beginning
* Steven Rostedt (rost...@goodmis.org) wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 15:13 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
* Steven Rostedt (rost...@goodmis.org) wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 13:16 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 12:33 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01
-- Steve
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency RD Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org
)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.32-stable percpu fixes
* Ben Hutchings (b...@decadent.org.uk) wrote:
These commits included in 2.6.32.12:
ea0a09acd81c6d52c77d80f0d4089795df7bcb58 modules: fix incorrect percpu usage
not be reverted in 2.6.32-stable?
(Matthieu previously asked whether it was really correct for 2.6.32:
http://linux.kernel.org/pipermail/stable-review/2010-April/003571.html )
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating
26 matches
Mail list logo
