2013/1/19 Bruno Wolff III :
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 11:57:16 +0100,
> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> What is the meaning of the latest kernel extra version numbers?
>> 3.7.1-1
>> 3.7.2-203
>> 3.7.2-204
>> 3.7.3-201
>>
Hi,
What is the meaning of the latest kernel extra version numbers?
3.7.1-1
3.7.2-203
3.7.2-204
3.7.3-201
I don't see any order here.
--
Best regards,
Michal
http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactive.pl/
___
kernel mailing list
kernel@lists.fedorapro
Hi,
W dniu 20 lutego 2012 19:52 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
> 2012/2/20 Dave Jones :
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 06:39:54PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > W dniu 7 stycznia 2012 16:34 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>> &g
2012/2/20 Dave Jones :
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 06:39:54PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > W dniu 7 stycznia 2012 16:34 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
> > napisał:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've noticed some strang
Hi,
W dniu 7 stycznia 2012 16:34 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
> Hi,
>
> I've noticed some strange soft lockup behaviour on my system (please
> see the attachment). Soft lockup appears to be caused by kswapd0
> process. It seems to me that in both cases this error o
20:58 użytkownik Dave Jones napisał:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 08:50:17PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> > I ask out of curiosity - why 2.6.40? Is it a big problem to run 3.0 on F15?
>
> A lot of broken software is assuming version numbers are 2.6.x. We could push
> a load
>
W dniu 6 sierpnia 2011 14:41 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
> W dniu 12 lipca 2011 22:45 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
> napisał:
>> I tested it, but it still corrupts data. On Thursday I'll do more
>> tests.
>
> Sorry for the nearly month delay :)
>
>
W dniu 12 lipca 2011 22:45 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
> I tested it, but it still corrupts data. On Thursday I'll do more
> tests.
Sorry for the nearly month delay :)
Today I tried to copy a file over samba to my encrypted dir and
operation still fails.
When I tried to
Hi,
2011/7/15 Lucas :
> Dear All.
>
> Just updated and got the following in dmesg:
It looks like a kernel bug.
>
>
>
> [ 37.653381] =
> [ 37.654015] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> [ 37.654015] 3.0-0.rc7.git0.1.fc16.i686 #1
> [
Hi,
2011/7/12 Genes MailLists :
> I'm running 3.0-0.rc6.git6.1.fc16.x86_64 on a new sandy bridge laptop on
> updated f15 (except for kernel, procps and mdadm from rawhide).
AFAIK it can be changed somehow
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/ther
W dniu 30 czerwca 2011 21:49 użytkownik Genes MailLists
napisał:
> On 06/30/2011 03:04 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> W dniu 30 czerwca 2011 20:58 użytkownik Dave Jones
>> napisał:
>
>>> A lot of broken software is assuming version numbers are 2.6.x. We could
>&
W dniu 30 czerwca 2011 20:58 użytkownik Dave Jones napisał:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 08:50:17PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2011/6/30 Dave Jones :
> > > I've just pushed a f15-2.6.39 branch which contains a work in progress
> rebase.
Hi,
2011/6/30 Dave Jones :
> I've just pushed a f15-2.6.39 branch which contains a work in progress rebase.
> The only thing that I'm really concerned about in this right now is X
> regressions.
> We had a drm-next backport to .38 and moving that to .39 turned up a ton of
> rejects.
> I fixed up
2011/1/5 Mr Dash Four :
>
>> The Fedora kernel team doesn't have the resources to support every random
>> user with a
>> random kernel config of the week. The Fedora kernel team does however
>> support the official Fedora kernels built in the Fedora build system and
>> released via the Fedora upda
Hi,
2010/11/29 Kyle McMartin :
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 02:30:47PM +0100, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> Ok, I still got it on 2.6.36-5.fc15.x86_64. I checked logs and with
>> 2.6.36-5 this bugs shows up spontaneously. Logs attached.
>>
>
> Try this one?
> http://kyle.fedorapeople.org/kernel/2.6.37-
Hi,
2010/11/25 Kyle McMartin :
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 03:32:38PM -0800, John Poelstra wrote:
>> I would like to help with this. To do so I need to know which tasks and
>> milestones to include in the schedule. Here is the current development
>> schedule for Fedora 15:
>>
>
> Sure, right now, w
2010/11/23 Kyle McMartin :
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:39:33PM +0100, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> > That's pretty messed up... Michal Jaegermann just reported he's still
>> > seeing it with 2.6.36.1 in
>> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630464...
>>
>> It seems to me that this kernel
Hi,
2010/11/22 Kyle McMartin :
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 05:34:51PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> Kyle McMartin (k...@mcmartin.ca) said:
>> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 08:38:10PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> > > [ 16.410415] [ cut here ]
>> > > [ 16.410427] WARNI
Hi,
2010/11/10 Kyle McMartin :
> What's the overhead? Why would we want to support it?
I've got two fairly new machines - one Atom 330 and one laptop with
T5270. Both CPU's doesn't have VMX support.
Is in this case Xen not the only reasonable solution in terms of speed?
> What's the upside?
>
>
2010/10/21 Kyle McMartin :
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 08:38:10PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> I hit this bug after upgrade from testing systemd repo
>>
>> [ 15.630389] WARNING: at drivers/char/tty_io.c:1325 tty_open+0x29c/0x49b()
>> [ 15.630393] Hardware name: HP 550
>> [ 15.630396] Modu
2010/10/21 Kyle McMartin :
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 08:38:10PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> I hit this bug after upgrade from testing systemd repo
>>
>> [ 15.630389] WARNING: at drivers/char/tty_io.c:1325 tty_open+0x29c/0x49b()
>> [ 15.630393] Hardware name: HP 550
>> [ 15.630396] Modu
I hit this bug after upgrade from testing systemd repo
[ 15.630389] WARNING: at drivers/char/tty_io.c:1325 tty_open+0x29c/0x49b()
[ 15.630393] Hardware name: HP 550
[ 15.630396] Modules linked in: snd_hda_codec_analog iwlagn
snd_hda_intel iwlcore snd_hda_codec snd_hwdep snd_seq uinput
snd_se
W dniu 12 października 2010 12:39 użytkownik Rodd Clarkson
napisał:
>
>
> 2010/9/28 Michał Piotrowski
>>
>> W dniu 27 września 2010 23:13 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>> napisał:
>> > 2010/9/27 Rodd Clarkson :
>> >> I've been having
CC'ing kernel list
Regards,
Michal
2010/10/4 Anne & Lynn Wheeler :
> EXT4 filesystem directory with 100,000+ small files, 4-core intel
> processor, batch process that runs parallel on all four processors
> ... adding/deleting several hundred files.
Let me guess - fsfuzzer? :)
>
> No problem on
Hi Jan,
I think that this problem is caused by
bdi-fix-warnings-in-__mark_inode_dirty-for-dev-zero-and-friends.patch
> No luck with this bug so far, but I noticed something else
>
> [ cut here ]
> WARNING: at fs/fs-writeback.c:78 inode_to_bdi+0x62/0x6d()
> Hardware name:
>
W dniu 24 września 2010 15:28 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
> 2010/9/24 Chuck Ebbert :
>> On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:06:25 +0200
>> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>
>>> RIP: 0010:[] []
>>> cfq_free_io_context+0x18/0x34
No luck with this b
2010/9/24 Chuck Ebbert :
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:06:25 +0200
> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
>> RIP: 0010:[] []
>> cfq_free_io_context+0x18/0x34
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577968
Thanks. If I find a repeatable path to reproduce the error I'l
2010/9/24 Kyle McMartin :
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:50:35PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> > I looked at that on Monday, but haven't found it yet.
>>
>> So it is a known problem. Good to know.
>>
>
> Aside from you reporting it, no, I haven't seen anything aside from some
> mails from Alexey
2010/9/24 Kyle McMartin :
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 08:58:59AM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> 2010/9/23 Chris Wright :
>> > * Roland McGrath (rol...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> >> That is fixed upstream in commit f362b73244fb16ea4ae127ced1467dd8adaa7733.
>> >> If that's not already queued for 2.6.35-
2010/9/23 Chris Wright :
> * Roland McGrath (rol...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> That is fixed upstream in commit f362b73244fb16ea4ae127ced1467dd8adaa7733.
>> If that's not already queued for 2.6.35-stable, then it probably should be.
>
> It is queued for 2.6.35-stable
>
Ok, thanks.
What about CFQ probl
Yet another "invoked rcu_dereference_check"
===
[ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
---
kernel/exit.c:1387 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
other info that might hel
Hi,
I downloaded and build this kernel
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=187678 on my F13
box. I am getting an error on boot. You might be interested in this
===
[ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
Hi,
2010/4/19 Kevin Fenzi :
> Greetings.
>
> I happened to see the other week that there are currently around 1600
> open kernel bugs in bugzilla against currently supported Fedora
> releases. :( The large majority of them are in NEW, and it's unclear
> how many are at all useful to us.
>
> I'd li
Hi,
What is the state of F11 kernel? AFAIK 2.6.30 is not supported by
upstream for a month. Upgrade to 2.6.31 doesn't solve this problem,
because 2.6.31.12 is probably the latest from 31 series. I have seen
failed 2.6.32 build for F11 in koji
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=15
Hi,
What is the state of F11 kernel? AFAIK 2.6.30 is not supported by
upstream for a month. Upgrade to 2.6.31 doesn't solve this problem,
because 2.6.31.12 is probably the latest from 31 series. I have seen
failed 2.6.32 build for F11 in koji
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=15
Hi,
What is the state of F11 kernel? AFAIK 2.6.30 is not supported by
upstream for a month. Upgrade to 2.6.31 doesn't solve this problem,
because 2.6.31.12 is probably the latest from 31 series. I have seen
failed 2.6.32 build for F11 in koji
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=15
36 matches
Mail list logo
