On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Note, back when kdump was added to the kernel many moons ago i strongly
> supported it and helped out with the patches, etc. I still think it might
> have the potential to become big - but it needs a ton of tech and care to
> reach that level
Congratulations Chris, you richly deserve this. And best of luck with
the real work, which begins now ;-)
Regards,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.or
* Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Mike Snitzer wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, especially from someone who lacks the ability to properly
> >> configure kdump. I'm fairly surprised others are giving you a free
> >> pass when you keep asserting how br
* Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >
> > I was thinking about experimenting with this, to see what level of
> > upside it might add. Ingo showed me numbers which indicate that a
> > fairly significant fraction of the cases where removing inline helps
> > i
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Actually, the real spin locks are now fair. We use ticket locks on x86.
Well, at least we do unless you enable that broken paravirt support. I'm
not at all clear on why CONFIG_PARAVIRT wants to use inferior locks, but I
don't much care.
No, it will continue to use ti
* Linus Torvalds wrote:
> As far as I'm concerned, digital cameras have been more useful than
> kernel dumps to kernel debugging.
Yes, especially ones with VGA video capture. (I caught a
"oops+triple-fault" crash via that trick once, which was not
serial-console capture-able and which was ju
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> I think that's mostly because kexec from arbitary context is a
> somewhat unstable concept.
I think that's the understatement of the year.
We have tons of problems with standard suspend-to-ram, and that's when the
suspend sequence has done its best
> In my experience, there are very few kernel versions and hardware for
> which kdump works.
I think that's mostly because kexec from arbitary context is a
somewhat unstable concept. It requires all drivers to be able
to reinit the hardware from an arbitary state, and that's just
hard (it's kind
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 01:21:06PM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > In practice i rarely see bugfixes that were debugged via kdump. Normal
> > oops based fixes outnumber kdump based fixes by a ratio of 1:100 or worse
> > - and kdump is readily available these days - just nobody configures it.
>
> So
Hallo everybody,
this patch adds a menu entry to kconfig to enable acls for btrfs.
Signed-off-by: Christian Hesse
---
--- a/fs/Kconfig2009-01-10 19:48:13.0 +0100
+++ b/fs/Kconfig2009-01-10 19:48:34.0 +0100
@@ -288,6 +288,18 @@
If unsure, say N.
+conf
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
>> Yes, especially from someone who lacks the ability to properly configure
>> kdump. I'm fairly surprised others are giving you a free pass when you
>> keep asserting how broken kdump is with such hollow criticism.
> Linus, what do you think about this particular approach of spin-mutexes?
> It's not the typical spin-mutex i think.
>
> The thing i like most about Peter's patch (compared to most other adaptive
> spinning approaches i've seen, which all sucked as they included various
> ugly heuristics comp
* Mike Snitzer wrote:
> Yes, especially from someone who lacks the ability to properly configure
> kdump. I'm fairly surprised others are giving you a free pass when you
> keep asserting how broken kdump is with such hollow criticism. I rely
> heavily on kdump and it works quite well (kvm i
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:44 AM, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 20:05 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Nicholas Miell wrote:
>> >
>> > It's only too big if you always keep it in memory, and I wasn't
>> > suggesting that.
>>
>> Umm. We're talking kernel panics h
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 6:56:02 am H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> This does bring up the idea of including a compiler with the kernel
> sources again, doesn't it?
Oh please don't give him any more ideas; first it was a terminal emulator that
had delusions of grandeur, then something to help him manage tha
15 matches
Mail list logo
