Re: Device hang when offlining a CPU due to IRQ misrouting

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:33:01AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:13:42AM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > > I see. Your system should have 4 or 8 logical cpu's right. So you must be > > using logical flat mode, right? > > I believe so. The system has two Xeon 5150s

Re: [PATCH] lguest-fix-divide-error-implement-sched_clock

Andi Kleen wrote: > > I don't think it's a good idea for the TSC. There are various > setups where it is unreliable and also often simulators don't > implement it correctly. And it's always a valuable workaround > to be able to turn it off. > I dug some more into the TSC code, and found some

Re: [patch 1/9] Conditional Calls - Architecture Independent Code

* Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > +struct __cond_call_struct { > > Calling structs *_struct is severly deprecated and will cause some people > to make fun of your code. > ok > > > + const char *name; > > + void *enable; > > +

Re: [PATCH] update checkpatch.pl to version 0.03

Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 21:08:07 +0200 Rene Herman wrote: > >> On 06/04/2007 09:08 PM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: >> >>> I guess line length and white space checks make sense some degree on >>> those files. I'll sort that out and I guess we'll have anohter version. >> Could you then

RE: volatile and atomic_t/spinlock_t

> So is > > while (__raw_spin_is_locked()); > > supposed to work? Or should that be > > while (__raw_spin_is_locked()) > cpu_relax(); > > as well and all the volatiles can/should go away? cpu_relax() is a really good idea in every spinloop on hyper-threaded cores. It

Re: 2.6.22-rc1-mm1

H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Andy Whitcroft wrote: >> I think that my debugging says that newsetup got the compressed kernel >> and decompressor into memory ok and execution passed to it normally. >> But I cannot figure out where the corruption is coming from. I tried >> annotating the gzip

Re: Problems (a bug?) with UINT_MAX from kernel.h

Richard Purdie wrote: > The kernel uses UINT_MAX defined from kernel.h in a variety of places. > > While looking at the behaviour of the LZO code, I noticed it seemed to > think an int was 8 bytes large on my 32 bit i386 machine. It isn't but > why did it think that? > > kernel.h says: > >

Re: Device hang when offlining a CPU due to IRQ misrouting

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:13:42AM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > I see. Your system should have 4 or 8 logical cpu's right. So you must be > using logical flat mode, right? I believe so. The system has two Xeon 5150s with an Intel 5000 chipset of some sort. > When this bug happens, what does

Re: [PATCH] UDF: coding style conversion - lindent fixups 2

[Joe Perches - Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:20:46AM -0700] | On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 22:03 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: | > - cpu_to_le32(epos.offset - | > - sizeof(struct allocExtDesc)); | > - if (!UDF_QUERY_FLAG(inode->i_sb,

Re: Device hang when offlining a CPU due to IRQ misrouting

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:23:10AM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > > > Darrick, I see a kernel bug in this area(which is already filled with bugs, > > and I am looking into ways to fix them). Are you making sure that > > between

Re: [PATCH 2/3] [PATCH powerpc] during VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group

Whoops.. sorry about any reply bounces, I flubbed the cc to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -Will On Tue, 2007-05-06 at 12:48 -0500, Will Schmidt wrote: > When we get into a state where VM has ran out of memory, and it's time to > thwack a process, we should take out the entire process group, rather than

Re: [PATCH 2/6] lguest tsc fix

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:56:36AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > In recent -mm kernels, the TSC capability cannot be disabled, > resulting in a divide by zero error in the normal sched_clock. That will hopefully change. I hope hpa will just undo this. > > The correct fix is to have a special

Re: [NFS] [PATCH 2/2] nfs4: on a O_EXCL OPEN make sure the SETATTR sets the fields holding the verifier

On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 13:56 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > The Linux NFS4 client simply skips over the bitmask in an O_EXCL open > call and so it doesn't bother to reset any fields that may be holding > the verifier. This patch has us save the first two words of the bitmask > (which is all the

[PATCH] UDF: coding style conversion - lindent fixups 2

This patch fixes sources were converted to kernel coding style by Lindent for first and then by hands. But some messed things were accidentally skipped. Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- Andrew, the patch is incremental over - udf-coding-style-conversion-lindent.patch -

[PATCH 2/2] nfs4: on a O_EXCL OPEN make sure the SETATTR sets the fields holding the verifier

The Linux NFS4 client simply skips over the bitmask in an O_EXCL open call and so it doesn't bother to reset any fields that may be holding the verifier. This patch has us save the first two words of the bitmask (which is all the current client has #defines for). The client then later checks this

[PATCH 1/2] nfsd: set the response bitmask for an EXCLUSIVE CREATE

RFC 3530 says: If the server uses an attribute to store the exclusive create verifier, it will signify which attribute by setting the appropriate bit in the attribute mask that is returned in the results. Linux uses the atime and mtime to store the verifier, but sends a zeroed out bitmask

[PATCH 0/2] intro: make NFSv4 exclusive open calls set and use the bitmask in the reply

Around a year ago, Chris Lalancette posted a patch to make it so that when an EXCLUSIVE nfs4 create is done, that the mtime and atime get properly updated in the following setattr call. At the time Trond replied that that approach was incorrect and that we need to check the bitmask in the reply to

Re: [PATCH] never called printk statement in ide-taskfile.c::wait_drive_not_busy

> On 06/04/2007 10:21 PM, Masatake YAMATO wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c b/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c > > index 30175c7..5e05311 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c > > +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c > > @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static u8 wait_drive_not_busy(ide_drive_t

[PATCH 2/3] [PATCH powerpc] during VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group

When we get into a state where VM has ran out of memory, and it's time to thwack a process, we should take out the entire process group, rather than just one thread. Tested on POWER5. Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c |4 +++- 1 files changed, 3

[PATCH 3/3] [PATCH x86_64] during VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group

When we get into a state where VM has ran out of memory, and it's time to thwack a process, we should take out the entire process group, rather than just one thread. Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- arch/x86_64/mm/fault.c |4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1

[PATCH 1/3] [PATCH i386] during VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group

When we get into a state where VM has ran out of memory, and it's time to thwack a process, we should take out the entire process group, rather than just one thread. Tested on i386 Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- arch/i386/mm/fault.c |4 +++- 1 files changed, 3

Re: [RFC][PATCH] muptiple bugs in PI futexes

Hello! > Hmm, what means not expected ? -ESRCH is returned, when the owner task > is not found. This is not supposed to happen with robust futexes. glibs aborts (which is correct), or for build with disabled debugging enters simulated deadlock (which is confusing). > lock. Also using uval is

Re: Device hang when offlining a CPU due to IRQ misrouting

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:23:10AM -0700, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > Darrick, I see a kernel bug in this area(which is already filled with bugs, > and I am looking into ways to fix them). Are you making sure that > between step-1 and step-2, that interrupts actually started arriving at cpu1? > >

Re: Device hang when offlining a CPU due to IRQ misrouting

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 05:44:27PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > Hi there, > > I'm seeing a driver hang with 2.6.22-rc3 while being slightly stupid > about offlining CPUs. I suspect that this problem extends beyond a > particular machine, as I've been able to replicate it with an IBM x3650 >

Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote: > FWIW, I am happy :-). We should add a comment to kmalloc() that we return > non-unique pointers for zero-length allocations though. Would you do that? Could you also add ZERO_SIZE_PTR support to SLAB? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: Intel's response Linux/MTRR/8GB Memory Support / Why doesn't the kernel realize the BIOS has problems and re-map appropriately?

On Tuesday, June 5, 2007 2:46 am Andi Kleen wrote: > > So the only safe thing we can do is not use memory that is not > > write-back cached. That we can positively detect and is a > > conservative action so if anything will work that will. > > Jesse wrote such a patch (or rather it limitted

Re: [5/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 07:02:53PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > On 05/06/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:44:09PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > > > > > Subject: usb hotplug/udev cannot correctly register usb/scanners > > > References :

Re: [PATCH] never called printk statement in ide-taskfile.c::wait_drive_not_busy

On 06/04/2007 10:21 PM, Masatake YAMATO wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c b/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c > index 30175c7..5e05311 100644 > --- a/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c > +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-taskfile.c > @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static u8 wait_drive_not_busy(ide_drive_t *drive) >

Re: [PATCH 3/6] lguest suppress IDE probing

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Alan Cox wrote: > Better yet just don't compile in the old IDE stuff, lguest doesn't have a > PCI or ISA bus anyway. The guest & host kernels are intended to be identical, so we could expect pretty much anything to be compiled in to the guest. The other two suggestions

Re: [PATCH] lguest-fix-divide-error-implement-sched_clock

Andi Kleen wrote: > > I don't think it's a good idea for the TSC. There are various > setups where it is unreliable and also often simulators don't > implement it correctly. And it's always a valuable workaround > to be able to turn it off. > > Except possibly for the FPU only features used by

Re: [patch 43/69] i386: HPET, check if the counter works

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, dean gaudet wrote: > > the HPET specification allows for HPETs with *much* lower resolution than > 50us. in fact Fmin is 10Hz iirc. (sorry to jump in so late, but i'm > about a month behind on the list.) Well, for such a broken HPET, the right thing to do is to just not

Re: [patch 43/69] i386: HPET, check if the counter works

ugh... do not send email before breakfast. do not send email before breakfast. nevermind :) -dean On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, dean gaudet wrote: > the HPET specification allows for HPETs with *much* lower resolution than > 50us. in fact Fmin is 10Hz iirc. (sorry to jump in so late, but i'm >

Re: FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE_PI is not quite there

On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 23:10 -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > I hooked up FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE_PI here and got a kernel crash. No serial > console so this is the output of the screen after the machine stopped. > > This is of course on x86-64. Compiled from a rawhide-ified upstream > kernel from two

Re: [PATCH 17/22] 2.6.22-rc3 perfmon2 : modified powerpc files

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Stephane Eranian wrote: > > > diff --exclude=.git -urp linux-2.6.22.base/include/asm-powerpc/unistd.h > > > linux-2.6.22/include/asm-powerpc/unistd.h > > > --- linux-2.6.22.base/include/asm-powerpc/unistd.h2007-05-29 > > > 03:17:57.0 -0700 > > > +++

Re: [patch 43/69] i386: HPET, check if the counter works

the HPET specification allows for HPETs with *much* lower resolution than 50us. in fact Fmin is 10Hz iirc. (sorry to jump in so late, but i'm about a month behind on the list.) -dean On Mon, 21 May 2007, Chris Wright wrote: > -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let

Re: [5/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:44:09PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > Subject: usb hotplug/udev cannot correctly register usb/scanners > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/15/205 > Submitter : [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Status : Unknown Art seems to not be

Re: [KJ] Re: [PATCH] bugfix GFP_KERNEL -> GFP_ATOMIC in spin_locked region

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:31:42 +0200 Yoann Padioleau wrote: > Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Am Dienstag, 5. Juni 2007 13:05 schrieb Yoann Padioleau: > >> Ok. Do you have a preference on the format ?  a : format  ? > >> > >> Is there a place that gathered all those implicit

Re: [PATCH] lguest-fix-divide-error-implement-sched_clock

On Tuesday 05 June 2007 18:16, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Yes. Since there is now a mechanism to get a clean message out, it > seemed like a good idea to extend the benefit of static determination. > Andi already had in his tree -- and I copied it -- code to deal with > stuff like "cpu_has_tsc" as

Re: alpha modpost warnings

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 07:35:02AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > WARNING: arch/alpha/kernel/built-in.o(.text+0x7d2c): Section mismatch: > reference to .init.text:init_rtc_irq (between 'common_init_rtc' and > 'timer_interrupt') Yeah, I know about them of course. The proper fix, as best I see it,

Re: [KJ] Re: [PATCH] bugfix GFP_KERNEL -> GFP_ATOMIC in spin_locked region

Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Dienstag, 5. Juni 2007 13:05 schrieb Yoann Padioleau: >> Ok. Do you have a preference on the format ?  a : format  ? >> >> Is there a place that gathered all those implicit programming rules >> (that copy_from_user must not be called inside a

Re: [PATCH 2.6.22 0/5] cxgb3 - bug fixes

Divy Le Ray wrote: Divy Le Ray wrote: Hi Jeff, I'm submitting a set of bug fixes for inclusion in 2.6.22. The patches are built against Linus'git tree. The mail title was incomplete. sorry about that. Cheers, Divy Hi Jeff, Did you get a chance to review the series I posted for driver

Re: [RFC][PATCH] muptiple bugs in PI futexes

Hi, On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 15:51 +0400, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: > The first chunk: results in self-inflicted deadlock inside glibc. > Sometimes futex_lock_pi returns -ESRCH, when it is not expected > and glibc enters to for(;;) sleep() to simulate deadlock. This problem > is quite obvious and I

Re: 2.6.22-rc3-mm1

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 09:17:35AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:05:36 +0200 Zoltan Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > -drivers-ata-add-sw-ncq-support-to-sata_nv-for-mcp51-mcp55-mcp61.patch > > >

Re: 2.6.22-rc3-mm1

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 14:05:36 +0200 Zoltan Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > > -drivers-ata-add-sw-ncq-support-to-sata_nv-for-mcp51-mcp55-mcp61.patch > > -drivers-ata-add-sw-ncq-support-to-sata_nv-for-mcp51-mcp55-mcp61-fix.patch > >

Re: [PATCH] lguest-fix-divide-error-implement-sched_clock

Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:24:52 +0200 Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Tuesday 05 June 2007 15:11, Rusty Russell wrote: >>> On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 12:01 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > But TSC is a "required feature", so "cpu_has_tsc" is always true. Hmm? It

Re: Linux 2.6.22-rc4 - sata_promise regression since -rc3

Linus Torvalds wrote: > So -rc4 is out there now, hopefully shrinking the regression list further. > I'd ask that people involved with the known regressions please test > whether they got fixed, and if you wrote a patch and it's still pending, > please make sure to push it upstream.. [Tejun,

Re: [KJ] Re: [PATCH] bugfix GFP_KERNEL -> GFP_ATOMIC in spin_locked region

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 13:05:18 +0200 Yoann Padioleau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> > >> net/wan/lmc/lmc_main.c|2 +- > >> scsi/megaraid/megaraid_mm.c |2 +- > >> usb/serial/io_ti.c|2 +- > >>

Re: [PATCH 3/6] lguest suppress IDE probing

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 05:07:47PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > Add an lguest check to go with the pci check and for the lguest case just > say "no controllers" > > Better yet just don't compile in the old IDE stuff, lguest doesn't have a > PCI or ISA bus anyway. > > Alternatively make the IDE I/O

Re: [PATCH] lguest-fix-divide-error-implement-sched_clock

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:24:52 +0200 Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 05 June 2007 15:11, Rusty Russell wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 12:01 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > But TSC is a "required feature", so "cpu_has_tsc" is always true. > > > > > > Hmm? It isn't. What makes

Re: skb->priority on arp packets

On 06/04/2007 04:23 PM, Marc Donner wrote: > hi @all, > > is it possible to set the skb->priority on arp packets generated by the > kernel? > I want to to set the 802.1p priority on arp and ip packets on an interface. > On > ip packets, this can be done by the iptables CLASSIFY target and the

Re: [PATCH 3/6] lguest suppress IDE probing

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 00:58:03 +1000 Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The IDE probe is the slowest part of boot: by suppressing it we cut > boot from from 3 seconds to half a second. NAK NAK NAK NAK NAK > AFAICT, the commandline is the easiest way to suppress the probing. Gaa ... Rusty

Re: Problems (a bug?) with UINT_MAX from kernel.h

Richard Purdie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If I try to compile the code fragment below, I see the error: > > #define UINT_MAX (~0U) > #if (0x == UINT_MAX) > #error argh > #endif The preprocessor computes all expressions with the largest available range. It does not know

Re: [Patch 04/18] include/linux/logfs.h

On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 17:49 +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > It would be better if GCC had a 'nopadding' attribute which gave us > > what we need without the _extra_ implications about alignment. > > That's impossible; removing the padding from a struct > _will_ make accesses to its members

Re: [PATCH/RFC] signal races/bugs, losing TIF_SIGPENDING and other woes

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > We don't actually call recalc_sigpending_tsk() when sending a signal to > some other task, we just set the flag... so I need to recheck my theory > here about recalc_sigpending_tsk being called for somebody else... > Something is doing it

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:50:56PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > If you don't have DMA capabilities, does libata still need ->pad and > > ->pad_dma set? > > It shouldn't - nor the prd. You don't need to use the default > ata_port_start in this case. I've just added ata_sff_port_start to my > tree

Re: [Patch] sane irq initialization in sedlbauer/hisax (was: hisax isdn card (Sedlbauer Speed Fax+) does not get an interrupt)

Hi, On Thu, 31 May 2007, Thomas Voegtle wrote: > == [...] > <06>2007 May 30 14:21:40 cbs kern: Sedlbauer: PCI base adr 0xa800 > <03>2007 May 30 14:21:40 cbs kern: irq 11: nobody cared (try booting with the > \"irqpoll\"

Re: Linux 2.6.22-rc4

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 12:41:44PM +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:29:43 +0100, David Greaves wrote: > > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > [Linus' 2.6.22-rc4 announcement] > > > > Compile warnings and a new regression: hang on boot during sata_promise > > detection... :( > >

Re: [Patch 04/18] include/linux/logfs.h

It would be better if GCC had a 'nopadding' attribute which gave us what we need without the _extra_ implications about alignment. That's impossible; removing the padding from a struct _will_ make accesses to its members unaligned (think about arrays of that struct). Segher - To unsubscribe

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:41:57AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:18:47PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > Meanwhile you decide that you have a right over _MY_ personal preferences. > > It's the same argument I'm afraid, just a different point of view. If > > _you_ do not

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

> If you don't have DMA capabilities, does libata still need ->pad and > ->pad_dma set? It shouldn't - nor the prd. You don't need to use the default ata_port_start in this case. I've just added ata_sff_port_start to my tree which figures out which to allocate for SFF devices. - To unsubscribe

Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] drivers/video/pm3fb.c: possible cleanups

Antonino A. Daplas wrote: Krzysztof, I think this patch is okay. If you need to add an option parser for your driver, you can always add this in the future. I haven't been doing cleanup of this driver as I am still working on it (as time allows). The copyarea acceleration is done and

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:18:47PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > Meanwhile you decide that you have a right over _MY_ personal preferences. > It's the same argument I'm afraid, just a different point of view. If > _you_ do not wish to abide by the header then turn off that feature in > your

Re: Interesting interaction between lguest and CFS

On 05/06/07, Dmitry Adamushko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > now at 257428593818894 nsecs > > cpu: 0 > .nr_running: 3 > .raw_weighted_load : 2063 > .nr_switches : 242830075 > .nr_load_updates : 30172063 > .nr_uninterruptible: 0 > .jiffies

Re: [PATCH 4/6] lguest don't signal like crazy, use LHREQ_BREAK command

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:00:06AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > We currently use a "waker" process: a child of the launcher which > selects() on the incoming file descriptors. It sends a SIGUSR1 to the > launcher whenever select() returns to kick the launcher out of the > kernel. If I break out

Re: 2.6.22-rc3 hibernate(?) disables SMART on ide

David Greaves wrote: Mark Lord wrote: That's odd. Could you try that again, with the latest (either v7.3 or v7.4) version of hdparm (from sourceforge) ? Using Debian's 7.3 via apt-get experimental - is that OK or would you like me to compile the upstream? No, what you have is good, thanks.

Re: [PATCH 3/6] lguest suppress IDE probing

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:58:03AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > The IDE probe is the slowest part of boot: by suppressing it we cut > boot from from 3 seconds to half a second. > > AFAICT, the commandline is the easiest way to suppress the probing. Switching to libata accomplishes the same and

[PATCH 6/6] lguest use hrtimers

(BTW Thomas, is the check for delta < minimum actually required in our set_next_event function?) >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 9 23:37:36 2007 Convert lguest to the hrtimer framework, enabling dynamic ticks and high resolution timers. Signed-off-by: James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: 2.6.22-rc3-mm1

On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 23:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.22-rc3/2.6.22-rc3-mm1/ drivers/built-in.o: In function `ahci_port_start': /home/rusty/linux-2.6.22-rc3-mm1/drivers/ata/ahci.c:1631: undefined reference to

[PATCH 5/6] lguest use TSC

James: Add rudimentary TSC-based clocksource support (based on Rusty's original patch). Rusty: Add rudimentary code to handle TSC changing. We can use the native sched_clock again, we just have to tell it the TSC speed (get_cpu_khz). (Note on benchmarks: Linux only sets the clock to the nearest

[PATCH 4/6] lguest don't signal like crazy, use LHREQ_BREAK command

We currently use a "waker" process: a child of the launcher which selects() on the incoming file descriptors. It sends a SIGUSR1 to the launcher whenever select() returns to kick the launcher out of the kernel. This has nasty side-effects: the waker needs to keep sending signals to avoid the

[PATCH 2/6] lguest tsc fix

In recent -mm kernels, the TSC capability cannot be disabled, resulting in a divide by zero error in the normal sched_clock. The correct fix is to have a special lguest sched_clock implementation: this is as simple as it gets. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---

[PATCH 3/6] lguest suppress IDE probing

The IDE probe is the slowest part of boot: by suppressing it we cut boot from from 3 seconds to half a second. AFAICT, the commandline is the easiest way to suppress the probing. Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- drivers/lguest/lguest.c |6 ++ 1 file changed, 6

[PATCH 1/6] lguest example launcher fix

"struct option" arrays handed to getopt_long() are supposed to be NULL-terminated. (Another patch added an arg and it finally segv'd). Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- Documentation/lguest/lguest.c |1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:18:47PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > If you are unwilling to fix the problem and work within existing > > community email standards, I think it would be fair to ask vger > > postmaster to start excising Mail-Followup-To headers. > > Well, that will leave me with _no_

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 11:11:04AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:59:46PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > It's the fact that I _am_ CC'd on replies, so I get one message from LKML > > one from the original poster, maybe one via another mailing list if it's > > also copied

Re: Problems (a bug?) with UINT_MAX from kernel.h

> The kernel uses UINT_MAX defined from kernel.h in a variety of places. > > While looking at the behaviour of the LZO code, I noticed it seemed to > think an int was 8 bytes large on my 32 bit i386 machine. It isn't but > why did it think that? > > kernel.h says: > > #define INT_MAX

Re: [1/3] 2.6.22-rc3: known regressions v2

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 16:13 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 14:20:44 +0200 Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc3. > > > > Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc. > >

[PATCH 4/4] mm: variable length argument support

From: Ollie Wild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Remove the arg+env limit of MAX_ARG_PAGES by copying the strings directly from the old mm into the new mm. We create the new mm before the binfmt code runs, and place the new stack at the very top of the address space. Once the binfmt code runs and figures

[PATCH 3/4] mm: move_page_tables{,_up}

Provide functions for moving page tables upwards. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Signed-off-by: Ollie Wild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- include/linux/mm.h |7 +++ mm/mremap.c| 105 - 2 files changed, 110

[PATCH 0/4] no MAX_ARG_PAGES

This patch-set aims at removing the current limit on argv+env space aka. MAX_ARG_PAGES. The new mm is created before the binfmt code runs, the stack is placed at the highest address supported by that architecture. The argv+env data is then copied from the old mm into the new mm (which is

[PATCH 1/4] arch: personality independent stack top

New arch macro STACK_TOP_MAX it gives the larges valid stack address for the architecture in question. It differs from STACK_TOP in that it will not distinguish between personalities but will always return the largest possible address. This is used to create the initial stack on execve, which we

[PATCH 2/4] audit: rework execve audit

The purpose of audit_bprm() is to log the argv array to a userspace daemon at the end of the execve system call. Since user-space hasn't had time to run, this array is still in pristine state on the process' stack; so no need to copy it, we can just grab it from there. In order to minimize the

Re: Interesting interaction between lguest and CFS

On 05/06/07, Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > Click into the lguest window and trigger the delay. I did: while true; do sleep 1; cat /proc/sched_debug > sched_debug.txt; done and got this, hopefully inside the window: Sched Debug Version: v0.02 now at 257428593818894 nsecs

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:59:46PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > It's the fact that I _am_ CC'd on replies, so I get one message from LKML > one from the original poster, maybe one via another mailing list if it's > also copied there. Add that in to the mix of all the other mail hitting > my MTA

Re: [1/2] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions with patches

On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 16:54 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > File systems > > Subject: JFFS2 issues > References : > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2007-May/018426.html > Submitter : Haavard Skinnemoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Caused-By : commit

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:56:03AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:51:49PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:35:23AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > > > BTW, please fix your mailer. It emits Mail-Followup-To headers that > > > hijack everyone on

Re: [2/2] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions with patches

On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 16:54 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > Hi all, > > Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc4 > with patches available. > > Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc. > http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions > > > > PCI > > Subject: Oops on

Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)

On 06/05/2007 04:40 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: Rene Herman wrote: No, what we have is a sizeof(pointer) sized pointer pointing to an object of size zero. ZERO_SIZE_PTR is butt-ugly. With a really ugly butt. It doesn't matter. It will never, ever, be used by anything except the

Re: [kbuild-devel] [PATCH 08/19] scripts: Make cleanfile/cleanpatch warn about long lines

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:57:59PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote: [] > expand | while read line > do case "$line" in >++*) echo "$line";; >$p*) [ ${#line} -gt $w79 ] && : ${long:=line} > echo "$line" | sed "/^$p/{s_ *\$__;s_^$p$s7${s}_$p${t}_;s_$s7 _${t}_g}" > ;; > *)

linux-ia64 build warning messages

Tony Luck wrote: > > > I used the sn2_defconfig in the tree :) > > So there is something odd happening. Russ complained that he > was still seeing several errors from the sn2_defconfig build > too when I posted the "last fix" to Len. But I don't see them > when I build. An additional data

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:51:49PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:35:23AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > BTW, please fix your mailer. It emits Mail-Followup-To headers that > > hijack everyone on the thread into the To field, breaking the normal > > LKML To/CC

Re: [2/2] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions with patches

Hi all, Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc4 with patches available. Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc. http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions PCI Subject: Oops on 2.6.22-rc2 when unloading the cciss driver References :

[1/2] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions with patches

Hi all, Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc4 with patches available. Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc. http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions Block devices Subject: loop devices limited to one single device References :

Re: [5/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

wonderful long list :) the 2.6.22 is the next unstable developing tree, the 2.7 tree? When not, then so be the stabilization kernel and so be 2.6.22-rcX ( X->1..15 ), and 0 regression. /* sorry for the spelling, but I learn English not. */ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: [4/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > SELinux > > Subject: very high non-preempt latency in context_struct_compute_av() > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/4/78 > Submitter : Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Handled-By : Stephen Smalley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >

Re: libata & no PCI: dma_[un]map_single undefined

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:35:23AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > BTW, please fix your mailer. It emits Mail-Followup-To headers that > hijack everyone on the thread into the To field, breaking the normal > LKML To/CC standard replying mechanism that has been working for a > decade. Sorry, I

Re: [5/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

Hello, The 2.6.22-rc3 USB issue was because I did not have the deprecated USB option enabled. Once I enabled it, the problem went away. That can be bug can be considered resolved. Justin. On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote: Hi all, Here is a list of some known regressions in

Re: [kbuild-devel] [PATCH 08/19] scripts: Make cleanfile/cleanpatch warn about long lines

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 04:12:54PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:38:34PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 10:19:59AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > [] > > > If on the other hand you are proposing a script to clean whitespace > > > damage in the code

Re: [4/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

Hi all, Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc4. Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc. http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions SATA/PATA Subject: 22-rc3 broke the CDROM in Dell notebook References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/27/63 Submitter : Gregor

Re: [5/5] 2.6.22-rc4: known regressions

Hi all, Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc4. Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc. http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions USB Subject: Unable to get HID descriptor (error sending control message: Operation not permitted) References :

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >