On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 04:27:11PM -0400, Kristian H??gsberg wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> As you may know, we've been working on a new FireWire stack over on
> linux1394-devel. The main driver behind this work is to get a small,
> maintainable and supportable FireWire stack, with an acceptable
>
On Wed 2 May 2007 01:23, Greg Ungerer pondered:
> Hi All,
>
> An update of the uClinux (MMU-less) code against 2.6.21.
> A lot of cleanups, and a few bug fixes.
>
> Ahead is more changes to finalize platform device support
> for the new style ColdFire serial driver, and switching to
> the generic
On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>* Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I noticed a (harmless) bounds warning triggered by the reduction in
>> > size of array->bitmap. Patchlet below.
>>
>> I just checked my logs, and it appears my workload didn't trigger this
>> one Mike.
On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 04:03 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> I just checked my logs, and it appears my workload didn't trigger this one
>> Mike.
>
>It's just a build time compiler warning.
Duh. I have a couple of pages of "may be used uninitialized"
On Wed, 2 May 2007 01:08:26 -0700
"Ulrich Drepper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Eric Dumazet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, poll() level edge semantic is well defined, you cannot cheat or
> > change it.
> >
> > If many threads call poll() on the same end point, they should *all*
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:51:40AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Thanks for the report. I can reproduce it.
> Bisection shows that x86_64-mm-paravirt-initial-pagetable.patch caused
> this.
> I didn't check whether the patch actually permits us to read kernel
> memory. Probably it does. Probably
You can do down_interruptible to make the down interruptible.
Bhuvan Kumar MITTAL wrote:
I'll rephrase the problem as follow:
I have a userthread which makes ioctl calls to the kernel and once it reaches inside the kernel it waits on a semaphore. It then does some work inside the kernel and
Am Mittwoch 02 Mai 2007 01:42 schrieb Randy Dunlap:
> > +The Userspace I/O HOWTO
>
> Most of this reads well. Thanks.
> A few typo corrections are below...
Thank you for your work. I generated a new patch that includes all your
suggestions and also fixes the build problems.
[...]
>
>
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 03:08:48PM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote:
> Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >(I've added the E1000 maintainers to the thread as I found the issue
> >seems to go away after I compile out that driver. For reference, I was
> >trying to figure out why I lose exactly 24 ticks about every
x86: tighten kernel image page access rights
On x86-64, kernel memory freed after init can be entirely unmapped instead
of just getting 'poisoned' by overwriting with a debug pattern.
On i386 and x86-64 (under CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA), kernel text and bug table
can also be write-protected.
Version
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Regarding features that are overdue for removal according to
> feature-removal-schedule.txt:
>
> I remember that at least one person used to watch for due dates for
> feature removal, wrote the removing patches, and sent them to the
> appropriate lists
Other than the detail of allowing a newline from doing:
echo > cpus
to work, I'm ok with this patch. It passes my cpuset_test,
and seems to allow unpopulating cpusets, as advertised.
Aha - as I was writing this, I noticed that the command:
echo -n '' > cpus
does -not- work! The
I'll rephrase the problem as follow:
I have a userthread which makes ioctl calls to the kernel and once it reaches
inside the kernel it waits on a semaphore. It then does some work inside the
kernel and continuously keeps looping between the kernel and user space in an
endless while loop.
I
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 11:51:41PM -0700, Tim Hockin wrote:
> I'm not sure what the right answer is. The code was designed to do
> the right thing, and yet in your case it's broken. Does it need to be
> a build option to work around broken hardware? Yuck.
Without a system that really needs
* Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I noticed a (harmless) bounds warning triggered by the reduction in
> > size of array->bitmap. Patchlet below.
>
> I just checked my logs, and it appears my workload didn't trigger this
> one Mike. [...]
yeah: this is a build-time warning and it
Hi
When compiling 2.6.21-rc7-mm2, I encountered this error.
=
CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_ethtool.o
CC [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.o
LD [M] drivers/net/e1000/e1000.o
LD drivers/net/ehea/built-in.o
CC [M]
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 04:03 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I just checked my logs, and it appears my workload didn't trigger this one
> Mike.
It's just a build time compiler warning.
> Ingo asked for a 0-100 rating, where 0 is mainline as I recall it, and 100 is
> the best of the breed. I'll
On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 23:22 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> - interactivity: precise load calculation and load smoothing
>
>This seems to help quite a bit.
>
>(5 second top sample)
>
> 2636 root 15 -5 19148 15m 5324 R 73 1.5 1:42.29 0
>
On 5/2/07, Eric Dumazet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, poll() level edge semantic is well defined, you cannot cheat or change it.
If many threads call poll() on the same end point, they should *all* return
POLLIN/whatever status.
This means to me it's the wrong abstraction for this. We
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:47:15 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:52 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> > Done, and done.
> > And I managed to capture more of the boot messages, too.
> > This new capture is in the "sequence" subdir at the previous link.
>
On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 23:22 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> i'm pleased to announce release -v8 of the CFS scheduler patchset. (The
>> main goal of CFS is to implement "desktop scheduling" with as high
>> quality as technically possible.)
>
>...
>
>>
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 23:22 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> - interactivity: precise load calculation and load smoothing
This seems to help quite a bit.
(5 second top sample)
2636 root 15 -5 19148 15m 5324 R 73 1.5 1:42.29 0 amarok_libvisua
5440 root 20 0 320m 36m 8388 S
> I tried the unprivileged mount v5 patches with 2.6.21.1. I made some
> experiments with normal filesystems (ext3, xfs, iso9660). I removed the
> FS_SAFE checks for that.
Thanks for looking at this.
> Mounting and umounting as unprivileged user (user1) works, e.g.
> (/mnt/user1 is a mount owned
On Wed, 2 May 2007 00:40:17 -0700
"Ulrich Drepper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - if you have multiple threads polling a futex and the waker wakes up
> one, what happens?
> It is simply not acceptable to have more than one thread return from
> the poll() call, this
> would waste too many
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree
On Wed, 2 May 2007 07:26:13 +0400 "Dan Kruchinin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I don't know why, but when I'm dereferencing PAGE_OFFSET(0xC000 on
> x86) address from user space on rc7-mm2 I don't receive SIGSEGV signal
> and there is no any core dump.
> btw: on poor rc-7 all is ok.
>
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 00:22 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> > That sounds exactly right to me! If the author says it's optional, it
> > might be discarded. If they say it's needed, it won't be. At least,
> > when I'm coding and gcc warns me
On Wed, 2 May 2007 09:16:59 +0200 Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > This clashes with Andi's "msr-index" patch:
> >
> > ftp://ftp.firstfloor.org/pub/ak/x86_64/quilt/patches/msr-index
>
> I see. He also moves these defines to another file. Not problem where they
> are. But it
Hi!
> I mean the SVGA chip-specific code.
Feel free to kill it, anybody using these cards is very unlikely to run
a 2.6.x kernel.
However, the BIOS mode switching is still useful.
Have a nice fortnight
--
Martin `MJ' Mares <[EMAIL
On Wed, 2 May 2007 00:43:16 -0600 Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tested on Xilinx Virtex ppc405, Katmai 440SPe, and Microblaze
>
> ...
>
> + * The SystemACE chip is designed to configure FPGAs by loading an FPGA
> + * bitstream from a file on a CF card and squirting it into FPGAs
On Wed, 2 May 2007, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > not only that, but there are numerous files that *already* use
> > "__unused":
> >
> > $ grep -rw __unused *
> > ... snip lots of output here ...
> >
> > as well as a few files that can now have their
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree
> Hi Robert,
>
> Em Sáb, 2007-04-28 às 06:32 -0400, Robert P. J. Day escreveu:
>> Replace the call to MINOR() with a call to the inline iminor()
>> routine.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> that's the last of those changes, but it's not clear who the
Mark,
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:52 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Done, and done.
> And I managed to capture more of the boot messages, too.
> This new capture is in the "sequence" subdir at the previous link.
thanks. Can you apply this patch please:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/13/190
It somehow did
On 5/1/07, Davi Arnaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The pollable futex approach is far superior (send and receive events from
userspace or kernel) to eventfd and fixes (supercedes) FUTEX_FD at the same
time.
[...]
You have to explain in detail how these interfaces are supposed to
work. From
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 08:53 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > So I do believe that we could probably do something about the IO
> > scheduling _too_:
> >
> > - break up large write requests (yeah, it will make for worse IO
> >throughput, but if make
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree
Paul M wrote:
> Otherwise the only way to reclaim
> the node for a different sibling is to delete the cpuset.
Ah - I just made sense of that sentence.
It means that if a particular memory node is in one cpuset, and you'd
like to have it in another cpuset instead, then with the existing
kernel
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
> That sounds exactly right to me! If the author says it's optional, it
> might be discarded. If they say it's needed, it won't be. At least,
> when I'm coding and gcc warns me something is unused, this is the
> decision I have to make ("is this
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> not only that, but there are numerous files that *already* use
> "__unused":
>
> $ grep -rw __unused *
> ... snip lots of output here ...
>
> as well as a few files that can now have their definition of that
> removed:
>
> $ grep -r "define
Hi Andrew,
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 02:48, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:33:41 +0200
>
> Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
> > With the macros a
Paul M wrote:
> Otherwise the only way to reclaim
> the node for a different sibling is to delete the cpuset.
I couldn't make sense of that sentence. Could you restate it?
> Yes, but that's arguably an artefact of the user using the wrong tool
> to update the cpu/node set. Doing "echo -n >
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Davi Arnaut a écrit :
>> Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> Davi Arnaut a écrit :
Asynchronously wait for FUTEX_WAKE operation on a futex if it still
contains
a given value. There can be only one futex wait per file descriptor.
However,
it can be rearmed
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
>
> And the winner is:
>
>
Tilman Schmidt wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
+
Tested on Xilinx Virtex ppc405, Katmai 440SPe, and Microblaze
Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/block/Kconfig |6 +
drivers/block/Makefile |1 +
drivers/block/xsysace.c |
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 23:41 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> > OTOH, your point about "__unneeded" is well taken. "__needed" and
> > "__optional" perhaps? But their feature is *exactly* that the don't
> > look like the gcc attributes, hence avoid their
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:01:22AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
>
> And the winner is:
>
>
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:28:18PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > +#define __attribute_unused__ __attribute__((unused))
>
> Suggest __unused which is shorter and looks compiler-neutral.
not only that, but there are numerous files
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
Reverting only that from
On Fri, Apr 27 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So I do believe that we could probably do something about the IO
> scheduling _too_:
>
> - break up large write requests (yeah, it will make for worse IO
>throughput, but if make it configurable, and especially with
>controllers that don't
Dan Williams wrote:
I am pleased to release this latest spin of the raid acceleration
patches for merge consideration. This release aims to address all
pending review items including MD bug fixes and async_tx api changes
from Neil, and concerns on channel management from Chris and others.
Data
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Davi Arnaut a écrit :
>> Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> Davi Arnaut a écrit :
Asynchronously wait for FUTEX_WAKE operation on a futex if it still
contains
a given value. There can be only one futex wait per file descriptor.
However,
it can be rearmed
On Tue, 1 May 2007 23:41:34 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> compiler: define __maybe_unused
>
> Define __maybe_unused to apply to both functions or variables as
> __attribute__((unused)). This will not emit a compile-time warning when
> a function or variable is
On 5/1/07, Rafal Bilski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2.6.21.1 is first kernel which I'm using at this device. Earlier it was
WindowsCE terminal. It is hardware fault. Commenting out the code is my
way to avoid "wakeup" messages in log, but I don't want to change anything
in vanilla kernel. I'm
Chris Wright wrote:
> It simply maps directly to the patch queue. We do go back and fold
> things in and that should probably be done again, I agree.
>
Yeah, I've folded them all up now. Tracking xen-unstable is going to be
tricker though.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
* Herbert Xu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ===
> > --- a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> > @@ -1213,10 +1213,10 @@ static int netif_poll(struct
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 1 May 2007 22:53:52 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:28:18PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
+#define __attribute_unused__ __attribute__((unused))
Suggest
* Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As usual, any sort of feedback, bugreport, fix and suggestion is
> > more than welcome,
>
> Greetings,
>
> I noticed a (harmless) bounds warning triggered by the reduction in
> size of array->bitmap. Patchlet below.
thanks, applied! Your
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
> OTOH, your point about "__unneeded" is well taken. "__needed" and
> "__optional" perhaps? But their feature is *exactly* that the don't
> look like the gcc attributes, hence avoid their semantic screwage.
>
Hmm, __optional doesn't sound appropriate
Davi Arnaut a écrit :
Eric Dumazet wrote:
Davi Arnaut a écrit :
Asynchronously wait for FUTEX_WAKE operation on a futex if it still contains
a given value. There can be only one futex wait per file descriptor. However,
it can be rearmed (possibly at a different address) anytime.
The pollable
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 23:22 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i'm pleased to announce release -v8 of the CFS scheduler patchset. (The
> main goal of CFS is to implement "desktop scheduling" with as high
> quality as technically possible.)
...
> As usual, any sort of feedback, bugreport, fix and
[...]
>
>> With code commented out I have 1 error / 3 transmitted packets from
>> DP83815C. I have 1 error / 10 transmitted packets to DP83815C. Maybe
>> it works at all because I have short cable, only 10m long.
>> I don't remember any errors with plain 2.6.21.1.
Sorry. I mean
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ===
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netfront.c
> @@ -1213,10 +1213,10 @@ static int netif_poll(struct net_device
Any reason why xen-netfront isn't just in a
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 23:06 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> > Adding this macro doesn't give us anything that simply saying
> > "__attribute__((unused))" doesn't give. But it does add a layer of
> > kernel-specific indirection.
> >
>
> That's
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 10:53:52PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
>On Wed, 2 May 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:28:18PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
>> > +#define __attribute_unused__ __attribute__((unused))
>>
>> Suggest __unused which is shorter and
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:52:55 +0100 Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude
> linux.vanilla-2.6.21-rc6-mm1/drivers/firmware/edd.c
> linux-2.6.21-rc6-mm1/drivers/firmware/edd.c
> ---
Adds the platform device definitions and the architecture specific support
routines (i.e. register initialization and descriptor formats) for the
iop-adma driver.
Changelog:
* add support for > 1k zero sum buffer sizes
* added dma/aau platform devices to iq80321 and iq80332 setup
* fixed the
On Tue, 1 May 2007, David Rientjes wrote:
> The patched version makes this:
>
> int type __attribute_unused__ = 0;
>
> which definitely tells you that you're using a compiler attribute that
> will be attached to that automatic. In your case:
>
> int type __unneeded = 0;
>
>
Adds the platform device definitions and the architecture specific
support routines (i.e. register initialization and descriptor formats) for the
iop-adma driver.
Changelog:
* added 'descriptor pool size' to the platform data
* add base support for buffer sizes larger than 16MB (hw max)
* build
replaced by raid5_run_ops
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/md/raid5.c | 124
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 124 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.c b/drivers/md/raid5.c
index c9b91e3..74ce354 100644
This is a driver for the iop DMA/AAU/ADMA units which are capable of pq_xor,
pq_update, pq_zero_sum, xor, dual_xor, xor_zero_sum, fill, copy+crc, and copy
operations.
Changelog:
* fixed a slot allocation bug in do_iop13xx_adma_xor that caused too few
slots to be requested eventually leading to
handle_stripe now only updates the state of stripes. All execution of
operations is moved to raid5_run_ops.
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/md/raid5.c | 68
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
Use raid5_run_ops to carry out the memory copies for a raid5 read request.
Changelog:
* cleanup to_read and to_fill accounting
* do not fail reads that have reached the cache
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/md/raid5.c | 61
The parity calculation for an expansion operation is the same as the
calculation performed at the end of a write with the caveat that all blocks
in the stripe are scheduled to be written. An expansion operation is
identified as a stripe with the POSTXOR flag set and the BIODRAIN flag not
set.
handle_stripe sets STRIPE_OP_CHECK to request a check operation in
raid5_run_ops. If raid5_run_ops is able to perform the check with a
dma engine the parity will be preserved in memory removing the need to
re-read it from disk, as is necessary in the synchronous case.
'Repair' operations re-use
handle_stripe sets STRIPE_OP_COMPUTE_BLK to request servicing from
raid5_run_ops. It also sets a flag for the block being computed to let
other parts of handle_stripe submit dependent operations. raid5_run_ops
guarantees that the compute operation completes before any dependent
operation starts.
handle_stripe sets STRIPE_OP_PREXOR, STRIPE_OP_BIODRAIN, STRIPE_OP_POSTXOR
to request a write to the stripe cache. raid5_run_ops is triggerred to run
and executes the request outside the stripe lock.
Changelog:
* make the 'rcw' parameter to handle_write_operations5 a simple flag, Neil
Brown
*
Each stripe has three flag variables to reflect the state of operations
(pending, ack, and complete).
-pending: set to request servicing in raid5_run_ops
-ack: set to reflect that raid5_runs_ops has seen this request
-complete: set when the operation is complete and it is ok for handle_stripe5
to
Prepare the raid5 implementation to use async_tx for running stripe
operations:
* biofill (copy data into request buffers to satisfy a read request)
* compute block (generate a missing block in the cache from the other
blocks)
* prexor (subtract existing data as part of the read-modify-write
The async_tx api provides methods for describing a chain of asynchronous
bulk memory transfers/transforms with support for inter-transactional
dependencies. It is implemented as a dmaengine client that smooths over
the details of different hardware offload engine implementations. Code
that is
Cc: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/arm/Kconfig |2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
index e7baca2..74077e3 100644
--- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Davi Arnaut a écrit :
>> Asynchronously wait for FUTEX_WAKE operation on a futex if it still contains
>> a given value. There can be only one futex wait per file descriptor. However,
>> it can be rearmed (possibly at a different address) anytime.
>>
>> The pollable futex
This effectively makes channels a shared resource rather than tying them
to a specific client. dmaengine now assumes that clients will internally
track how many channels they need and dmaengine will learn if the client cares
about
a channel at dma_event_callback time. This also enables a client
On Wed, 02 May 2007 08:09:29 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 17:33 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:43:31 -
> > Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew,
> > >
> > > please pick up the following updates to
In preparation for the async_tx (dmaengine client) API this patch:
1/ introduces struct dma_async_tx_descriptor as a common field for all
dmaengine software descriptors. The primary role of this structure
is to enable callbacks at transaction completion time, and support
transaction
I am pleased to release this latest spin of the raid acceleration
patches for merge consideration. This release aims to address all
pending review items including MD bug fixes and async_tx api changes
from Neil, and concerns on channel management from Chris and others.
Data integrity tests using
Balbir wrote:
> Would it be possible to extract those test cases and integrate them
> with a testing framework like LTP? Do you have any regression test
> suite for cpusets that can be made available publicly so that
> any changes to cpusets can be validated?
There are essentially two sorts of
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Adding this macro doesn't give us anything that simply saying
> "__attribute__((unused))" doesn't give. But it does add a layer of
> kernel-specific indirection.
>
That's obviously true since we're defining __attribute_unused__ to be
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 17:33 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:43:31 -
> Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > please pick up the following updates to clocksource / clockevents:
> >
> > - Fixups to the resume logic
> > - Keep TSC stable, when
On Tue, 1 May 2007 22:53:52 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:28:18PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > > +#define __attribute_unused__ __attribute__((unused))
> >
> > Suggest __unused
On Wed, 02 May 2007 02:22:35 -0300 Davi Arnaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch set introduces a new file system for the delivery of pollable
> events through file descriptors. To the detriment of debugability, pollable
> objects are a nice adjunct to nonblocking/epoll/event-based servers.
On Wed, 02 May 2007 02:22:35 -0300 Davi Arnaut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch set introduces a new file system for the delivery of pollable
events through file descriptors. To the detriment of debugability, pollable
objects are a nice adjunct to nonblocking/epoll/event-based servers.
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
Adding this macro doesn't give us anything that simply saying
__attribute__((unused)) doesn't give. But it does add a layer of
kernel-specific indirection.
That's obviously true since we're defining __attribute_unused__ to be
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 17:33 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:43:31 -
Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
please pick up the following updates to clocksource / clockevents:
- Fixups to the resume logic
- Keep TSC stable, when lapic_timer_c2_ok is
On Tue, 1 May 2007 22:53:52 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:28:18PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
+#define __attribute_unused__ __attribute__((unused))
Suggest __unused which is
Balbir wrote:
Would it be possible to extract those test cases and integrate them
with a testing framework like LTP? Do you have any regression test
suite for cpusets that can be made available publicly so that
any changes to cpusets can be validated?
There are essentially two sorts of cpuset
I am pleased to release this latest spin of the raid acceleration
patches for merge consideration. This release aims to address all
pending review items including MD bug fixes and async_tx api changes
from Neil, and concerns on channel management from Chris and others.
Data integrity tests using
On Wed, 02 May 2007 08:09:29 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 17:33 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:43:31 -
Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
please pick up the following updates to clocksource /
In preparation for the async_tx (dmaengine client) API this patch:
1/ introduces struct dma_async_tx_descriptor as a common field for all
dmaengine software descriptors. The primary role of this structure
is to enable callbacks at transaction completion time, and support
transaction
501 - 600 of 1184 matches
Mail list logo
