Hi!
> >>The code has improved, and continues to improve, to meet all the coding
> >>style feedback except the bits which are essential to AA's function
> >
> >Which are exactly the bits Christoph Hellwig and Al Viro
> >vetoed. http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0706.1/2587.html
> >. I
Hi,
I've found a preemption problem in kernel/rtmutex.c:649. The BUG_ON
listed in the patch below makes sure a preemption event hasn't occurred since
the thread last checked the owner of the lock. If it did happen and the
current task is now the owner, it asserts with BUG_ON. With
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 06:01:23PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Its unlikely the command got lost. The IRQ could have done but the error
> path tries to spot that case by reading the status register - which
> hangs. So in theory it could be a lost IRQ and if the reset works we'll
> find that out.
On Jun 21, 2007, Andrew McKay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> how can the server tell if it's been tampered with?
> I agree with this statement.
Err... That's a question, not a statement ;-)
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin
On Jun 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
> Apparently the only restrictions ever permitted are the ones the FSF
> thinks of.
Where does this nonsensical idea come from? How does it follow that,
from FSF offering a licensing option to authors, you conclude that
nobody could
On Sunday 17 June 2007, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
[ ... ]
> >>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/alim15x3.c
> >>>===
> >>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/alim15x3.c
> >>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/alim15x3.c
> >>>@@ -594,7 +594,7 @@ out:
> >>> *
On Sunday 17 June 2007, Masatake YAMATO wrote:
> > Please re-submit this fix in the form of a patch so I can merge it.
>
> Here it is.
Applied but please remember to always include patch description when
sending the improved version of the patch. This time I fixed it manually
to speed up the
On 21 Jun 2007, Miklos Szeredi said:
> I'm working on this actually. See this (and related patches) in -mm:
>
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.22-rc4/2.6.22-rc4-mm2/broken-out/unprivileged-mounts-add-user-mounts-to-the-kernel.patch
>
> This solves the
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> A veto is not a technical argument. All technical arguments (except for
> "path name is ugly, yuk yuk!") have been addressed, have they not?
AppArmor doesn't actually provide confinement, because it only operates on
filesystem objects.
What you
On 6/7/07, Jesse Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On some machines, buggy BIOSes don't properly setup WB MTRRs to
cover all available RAM, meaning the last few megs (or even gigs)
of memory will be marked uncached. Since Linux tends to allocate
from high memory addresses first, this causes the
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > I'll see if I can reproduce your problem here.
>
> Yes, I can. It's only necessary to load usb-storage (without any devices
> actually using it) and it fails device_suspend() immediately (I don't think
> it's freezer-related).
>
> I've got the
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> We don't do nesting locking either, for exactly the same reason. Are
> nesting locks "easier"? Absolutely. They are also almost always a sign of
> a *bug*. So making spinlocks and/or mutexes nest by default is just a way
> to encourage bad
On Jun 21, 2007, Bernd Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I went and made some comments on the draft, and they appear to no
> longer be there a few days later.
This would be very bad. Please let me know what they were about and
I'll try to figure out what happened.
Did you by any chance file
On Jun 21, 2007, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:55:10 -0700
>> "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > A key is a number. A signature is a number. They are neither
>> > statements nor
>> > instructions. The argument that GPLv2 prohibits Tivoization
On Jun 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>> no, one of the rules for the network is that the software must be
>>> certified,
>>
>> In this case you might have grounds to enforce this restriction of
On 2007-06-21T12:30:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> well, if you _really_ want people who are interested in this to do weekly
> "why isn't it merged yet you $%#$%# developers" threads that can be
> arranged.
>
> the people who want this have been trying to be patient and let the system
> work.
On 6/21/07, Rudolf Marek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, it makes sense :)
>
> Name (FBUF, Package (0x06)
> {
> 0x03,
> CPUF,
> CHAF,
> PWRF,
> CHPF,
> CH2F
> })
>
> Clearly the first number is not the number of available readings (though
> it matches the count in the
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
If that is the only way to implement AA on top of SELinux - and so far,
noone has made a better suggestion - I'm convinced that AA has technical
merit: it does something the on-disk label based approach cannot handle,
and for which there is demand.
Peter Rabbitson wrote:
>
> I have captured dmesg output without mem[5], with mem=3900M[6] and
> mem=2048M[7].
>
What does /proc/mtrr look like in the two cases?
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2007-06-21T20:33:11, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> inconvenient, yes, insecure, no.
Well, only if you use the most restrictive permissions. And then you'll
suddenly hit failure cases which you didn't expect to, which can
possibly cause another exploit to become visible.
> I
David Schwartz wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:55:10 -0700
"David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A key is a number. A signature is a number. They are neither
statements nor
instructions. The argument that GPLv2 prohibits Tivoization is
really and
truly absurd. It has
Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
>> That's already handled just fine:
>>
>> bash-3.1$ mkdir /tmp/'Jag är: \
>> en liten mask'
>> bash-3.1$ sudo mount -t tmpfs none '/tmp/Jag är: \
>> en liten mask'/
>> bash-3.1$ tail -1 /proc/mounts
>> none /tmp/Jag\040är:\040\134\012en\040liten\040mask tmpfs rw 0 0
>>
On 6/20/07, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Display the current usage and limit in a more user friendly manner. Number
of pages can be confusing if the page size is different. Some systems
can choose a page size of 64KB.
I'm not sure that's such a great idea. "Human-friendly"
Hi,
I think you might be interested in following patch, which implements _ACPI_
driver for the same hardware...
It is only "proof of concept" at the moment, but it does main thing -- reads
hwmon device using ACPI interfaces.
Regards,
Alex.
Rudolf Marek wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Of course it is
Am Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2007 00:46 schrieb H. Peter Anvin:
> Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > What happens with the (sick) case of spaces in directory names?
> > Also is it really nicely defined that there is no way to put a space
> > in an option in any of the filesystems? I suppose someone
>
On Jun 21 2007 21:00, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>I know it's a crude idea for everyday Linux processes, but for
>dosemu driven applications, which behave badly in a multitasking OS
>*and* for which source code isn't available, it may be worth to
>discuss.
Would dosbox do? (it does busy-loops too,
Linus Torvalds:
> I suspect that this is about a few hundred lines of code (and a lot of
> testing). And you can emulate O_DIRECT behavior with it, along with
> splice (only for page-cache entities, though), and a lot of other
> off-by-one uses.
( http://lwn.net/2002/0516/a/lt-async.php3 )
I
Hi again,
Of course it is not there because I removed it myself :/ The "sensors" command
will just produce "general parse error" this is because of the unknown device
class (imho). So I removed that and forgot. Well now I have the sysfs files:
/sys/class/hwmon/hwmon2/device/:
bus
Am Donnerstag, 21. Juni 2007 20:26 schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
>
> Of course there may be hacks that try to figure out if a DOS window is
> idle, waiting for user input. (Seems like a new invention in Windows 2000
> and up). Since dosemu and all the emulators are not running a genuine
> Microsoft DOS
On 06/21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Yes, the target thread is the one that caused the SIGSEGV, it sends the
> > signal
> > to itself. entry.S:ret_from_exception should notice this signal and
> > _dequeue_
> > it, no? This signal could be
On Thu, Jun 21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Will Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > I'll second that. The obvious gotcha is that on a G5, the windfarm
> > drivers don't get automatically selected, thus the fans run at full
> > speed, and my office becomes a windtunnel. :-)
>
> Since
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 19:46 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> On 070621 19:33, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 19:25 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > > On 070621 19:21, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02
Jesper Juhl wrote:
On 20/06/07, Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This trivial patch adds braces over a one-line
loop. That makes code...well... little bit
convenient for (possible) further modifications.
That's generally not done.
It's even in Documentation/CodingStyle :
"
Do not
The loop to disable slabs can use step 8. Looks a bit strange the way it
is now.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
mm/slub.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm2/mm/slub.c
Hello Luca,
Sorry for delay,
Ok, it makes sense :)
Name (FBUF, Package (0x06)
{
0x03,
CPUF,
CHAF,
PWRF,
CHPF,
CH2F
})
Clearly the first number is not the number of available readings (though
it matches the count in the other DSDTs I've seen); don't know what it
is :|
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> This reminds me Nick's proposal of 'queued spinlocks' 3 months ago
>
> Maybe this should be re-considered ? (unlock is still a non atomic op,
> so we dont pay the serializing cost twice)
No. The point is simple:
IF YOU NEED THIS, YOU ARE
This patch changes the test for the thread pid from >= 0 to > 0.
When the saa8134 driver initialization fails after a certain point,
it goes through the complete shutdown process for the driver. Part
of shutting it down includes tearing down the thread for tv audio.
The test for tearing
> So much for "Land of the free". :(
That was always just a typo. Its the Land of the Fee
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ
Hi David,
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:47:12 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 11:33 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > OK. This leads me to a question: is it OK for me to add support for my
> > non-input device to inputattach, or is a separate, dedicated helper
> > tool preferred? Both
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 11:25:48AM -0700, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 09:36:30AM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007 04:49, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 11:38:02PM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 19 June 2007 18:50,
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Yes, the target thread is the one that caused the SIGSEGV, it sends the signal
> to itself. entry.S:ret_from_exception should notice this signal and _dequeue_
> it, no? This signal could be stealed by signal(SIG_IGN) which runs after it
> was
Hi!
> I've caught up on this thread with growing disbelief while reading the
> mails, so much that I've found it hard to decide where to reply to.
>
> So people are claiming that AA is ugly, because it introduces pathnames
> and possibly a regex interpreter. Ok, taste differs. We've got many
>
Chris Zankel wrote:
Jeremy,
Could you please add the ELF architecture-magic number for Xtensa (94)
when you finally submit this patch?
I guess, but I think it would be better if you just sent an incremental
patch to add it. Does my patch work OK for Xtensa?
J
-
To unsubscribe from
> "Mattias" == Mattias Wadenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mattias> In theory, that's how storage should work. In practice,
Mattias> silent data corruption does happen. If not from the disks
Mattias> themselves, somewhere along the path of cables, controllers,
Mattias> drivers, buses, etc.
Hi,
I don't understand this messages available in /var/log/messages about
gconfd.
I don't use gnome (my desktop installed is KDE on Debian Etch, with
tasks="standard, kde-desktop" in boot line of installer DVD).
==
gconfd (yamane-4120): GConf server is not in use, turn-off.
gconfd
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:31:53 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> >
> > A while ago I showed that spinlocks were a lot more fair when doing
> > unlock with the xchg instruction on x86. Probably the arbitration is all
> > screwed
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> However, if GPLv3 had a permission to combine/link with code under
> GPLv2, *and* Linux (and any other projects interested in mutual
> compatibility) introduced an additional permission to combine/link
> with code under GPLv3 (or even GPLv3+, constrained by some
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:51:06AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you snippede the bit about not knowing how to stop it
I did? As far as I can tell I quoted it all. What did I miss?
they call the section the anti-tivoization, how much more
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Marco Berizzi wrote:
> > > Some RCU callback (that calls kmem_cache_free()) oopsed and
> > > panic'ed his box. [ Marco had experienced fs issues lately, so we
> > could
> > > suspect file_free_rcu() here, but I can't really tell from the stack
> > trace;
> > > BTW whats with
On Jun 21 2007 19:50, Jan Kandziora wrote:
>
>Dear all,
>
>I like to use an old DOS/Clipper application through DOSEMU on a Linux
>application server in a hotel. It works, but (as usual with DOS), it causes
>a processor load of 100% in certain situations, while just waiting for user
>interaction.
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Will Schmidt wrote:
>
> I'll second that. The obvious gotcha is that on a G5, the windfarm
> drivers don't get automatically selected, thus the fans run at full
> speed, and my office becomes a windtunnel. :-)
Since when has "default" been anything but "default". It
On 06/21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Yes, force_sig() unblocks and un-ignores the signal. However, unlike
> > group-wide
> > signals, thread-specific signals do not convert themselves to SIGKILL on
> > delivery.
> > The target thread should
Hi!
> >> It's really not worth getting bothered by. Truth is, big
> >> giant
> >> pathnames break lots of stuff already, both kernel and
> >> userspace.
> >
> >> Just look in /proc for some nice juicy kernel breakage:
> >> cwd, exe, fd/*, maps, mounts, mountstats, root, smaps
> >
> >Well, but we
Hi,
> > Even if it does not really improve security too much it can be helpful as a
> > part of a larger system. For example around here we use a 'sbit-checker'
> > that
> > basically does a 'find' and 'chmod', which we would be able to replace by
> > this
> > patch.
>
> Something that sounds
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
>
> Subject: long freezes on thinkpad t60
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/24/100
> Submitter : Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Handled-By : Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Patch : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/16/81
>
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:55:10 -0700
> "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A key is a number. A signature is a number. They are neither
> > statements nor
> > instructions. The argument that GPLv2 prohibits Tivoization is
> > really and
> > truly absurd. It has neither a legal nor a
Hi,
Suspend to ram work very fine in my Toshiba M45-S355, but when laptop
return (from RAM), my network connection crash, and I need unload and
load again my sky2 module (using kernel 2.6.21.1).
My NIC is:
Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 88E8036 PCI-E Fast Ethernet Controller
(rev 10)
See
The suspend and resume support only needs to be built if
CONFIG_PM is defined.
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.21-quilt9/drivers/mfd/sm501.c
===
--- linux-2.6.21-quilt9.orig/drivers/mfd/sm501.c
+++
been away, back now...
Tejun Heo wrote:
David Greaves wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
How reproducible is the problem? Does the problem go away or occur more
often if you change the drive you write the memory image to?
I don't think there should be activity on the sda drive during resume
itself.
Ack
Works for me. Thanks.
Note:
Both Masami's patch and the relay-file-read-start-pos-fix.patch I posted
earlier are required.
Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
Hi Tom,
Tom Zanussi wrote:
Could you send more info on how to reproduce the problem you're seeing?
And does this patch fix it?
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:51:06AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> you snippede the bit about not knowing how to stop it
I did? As far as I can tell I quoted it all. What did I miss?
> they call the section the anti-tivoization, how much more explicit can
> they get?
They could be as
Jeff Dike wrote:
I recieved from Guido Guenther the patch below to the TUN/TAP driver
which allows group ownerships to be effective.
It seems reasonable to me.
Looks good to me too. We'll add to my tree. In the mean time I don't
mind if one of net drv maintainers pushes it upstream.
Thanx
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 07:34:45PM +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> On 070621 19:26, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:29:17PM +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > > On 070621 18:19, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at
Hi Sergei,
On Thursday 21 June 2007, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > [PATCH] ide: use PIO/MMIO operations directly where possible
>
> > This results in smaller/faster/simpler code and allows future optimizations.
> > Also remove no longer needed
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Yes, force_sig() unblocks and un-ignores the signal. However, unlike
> group-wide
> signals, thread-specific signals do not convert themselves to SIGKILL on
> delivery.
> The target thread should dequeue SIGSEGV and then it calls do_group_exit().
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 21, 2007, jimmy bahuleyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There, that right there, wouldn't it again require a 'nod' from all
those who have contributed to the kernel (because at the time they did,
the license was GPLv2 without any additions)?
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:39:07AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Here's an idea that just occurred to me, after all the discussions
> about motivations, tit-for-tat, authors' wishes and all.
>
> If GPLv3 were to have a clause that permitted combination/linking with
> code under GPLv2, this
On Thu 2007-06-21 18:01:05, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007 01:49, Greg KH wrote:
> > But for those types of models that do not map well to internal kernel
> > structures, perhaps they should be modeled on top of a security system that
> > does handle the internal kernel
Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> While copying a small file over to a windows box via cifs, once again I
> got something like this:
Again with 2.6.21.5:
===
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.21.5 #10
Hi,
Ph. Marek wrote:
in Oct 2000 there's been some discussion "Tux2 - evil patents sighted"
(http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0010.0/0343.html), and in Aug
2002 (http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0208.3/0332.html) Daniel
wrote
It's well down my list of priorities
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 19:36 +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> >
> > It's already annoying that they appear on x86 now -- that's for the 3button
> > emulation needed on x86 macs -- but at least don't make them default.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL
Hello.
Alan Cox wrote:
Google seems to show that there is no publically available
firmware updates for Maxtor disks.
There are for some but only if you irritate the tech support people.
hours at high cpu usage There were maybe a a dozen DriveReady
SeekComplete Timeout errors
Hello,
While copying a small file over to a windows box via cifs, once again I
got something like this:
===
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
2.6.21.4 #8
---
cp/3088 is
On Jun 21, 2007, jimmy bahuleyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There, that right there, wouldn't it again require a 'nod' from all
> those who have contributed to the kernel (because at the time they did,
> the license was GPLv2 without any additions)?
That's my understanding, yes, but IANAL.
On Thu, Jun 21, Olaf Hering wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > It's already annoying that they appear on x86 now -- that's for the 3button
> > emulation needed on x86 macs -- but at least don't make them default.
> > +++ linux/drivers/macintosh/Kconfig
> > @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
> >
From: Joerg Roedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This patch adds an implementation to the svm is_disabled function to
detect reliably if the BIOS disabled the SVM feature in the CPU. This
fixes the issues with kernel panics when loading the kvm-amd module on
machines where SVM is available but disabled.
Dear all,
I like to use an old DOS/Clipper application through DOSEMU on a Linux
application server in a hotel. It works, but (as usual with DOS), it causes
a processor load of 100% in certain situations, while just waiting for user
interaction.
That's kind of stupid, as power saving is heavily
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:26:04AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the bios doesn't have enough capability to talk to the outside world for
updates.
Of course, although perhaps it could. More likely my thought was that
the service when it decides
> Yeah .."allow movement if it doesn't result in changing kernel-threads's cpu
> affinity" sounds good, except it is hard to implement in cpuset's
> context I think. For ex: we now have to take additional steps when
> changing 'cpus_allowed' of a cpuset such that it doesn't violate any cpu
>
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 02:35 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> Right now, Linux isn't all that friendly to JIT emulators.
> Here are the problems and suggestions to improve the situation.
>
> There is an SE Linux execmem restriction that enforces W^X.
> Assuming you don't wish to just disable SE
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> I guess I suggest a single comma-separated field with flags and optional
> ":argument":
>
> private
> shared:
> slave:
> unbindable
> overmounted
>
Just realized: overmounted should presumably have a mount ID associated
with it, too.
On 070621 19:33, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 19:25 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > On 070621 19:21, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > > > Modified task_struct to hold a
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:26:04AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> the bios doesn't have enough capability to talk to the outside world for
> updates.
Of course, although perhaps it could. More likely my thought was that
the service when it decides to download an update, would include the
[PATCH] serial : convert early_uart to earlycon for 8250 fix 3 alias
make the console=uart,io,0x3f8,9600n8 like console=uart8250,io,0x3f8,9600
suggested by Andy Whitcroft.
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt 2007-06-21
Hello everyone,
I hope this question is not too basic for the intended audience. I have
a server with an Intel SE7210TP1-E motherboard[1] and a single 3.4GHz P4
CPU[2]. I am currently running a vanilla 2.6.21.5 kernel with SMP/HT.
Two patches are applied: one is a SATA driver[3] and the other
Ram Pai wrote:
>
> Peter, I am not working on it currently. But i am interested in getting
> it done. I have the seed set of patches which had Al Viro's ideas
> incorporated. Infact those patches were sent on lkml 2 months back.
> Shall we start with those patches?
>
Okay, so what I see in your
On Wed, Jun 20, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> It's already annoying that they appear on x86 now -- that's for the 3button
> emulation needed on x86 macs -- but at least don't make them default.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> drivers/macintosh/Kconfig |2 +-
> 1 file
[Jesper Juhl - Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 07:20:33PM +0200]
| From: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Cc: LKML
| Subject: Re: [PATCH] bracing the loop in kernel/softirq.c
| Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:20:33 +0200
|
> On 21/06/07, Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL
On 070621 19:26, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:29:17PM +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > On 070621 18:19, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Johannes Schlumberger wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
>
> A while ago I showed that spinlocks were a lot more fair when doing
> unlock with the xchg instruction on x86. Probably the arbitration is all
> screwed up because we use a mov instruction, which while atomic is not
> locked.
No, the cache line
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 19:25 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> On 070621 19:21, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > > Modified task_struct to hold a 'signed flag' which is set on exec(),
> > > inherited
> > > on
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 16:33 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> Having read the RSS and Pagecache controllers some things bothered me.
>>>
>>> - the duplication of much of the reclaim data (not code)
>>>and the size increase as a result thereof.
>>>
When trying manually to get the on-board broadcom adapter working I get
this:
Jun 21 16:50:47 urpdev1 kernel: [ 184.528092] Broadcom NetXtreme II
Gigabit Ethernet Driver bnx2 v1.4.45 (September 29, 2006)
Jun 21 16:50:47 urpdev1 kernel: [ 184.539831] ACPI: PCI Interrupt
:05:00.0[A] -> GSI 16
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 04:07:57PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
I do not say that the BIOS is doing anything (legally) wrong. The
wrong act is distributing the binary kernel image without distributing
complete source code for it.
So how about
On 070621 19:21, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > Modified task_struct to hold a 'signed flag' which is set on exec(),
> > inherited
> > on fork() and checked during exec before giving the new process suid/sgid
> >
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:07:12AM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Ingo, responding to Srivatsa:
> > > Or maybe allow movement if it
> > > doesn't result in changing kernel-threads's cpu affinity.
> >
> > yeah, i'd agree ..
>
> Good point. I'd agree too.
Yeah .."allow movement if it doesn't
Hi Benedikt,
On 6/21/07, Benedikt Spranger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fix the reporting order of BTN_TOUCH to coordinates first, then
BTN_TOUCH. This simplifies touchscreen event dispatcher. The userspace
should count on the kernel and get BTN_TOUCH-events with updated
coordinates.
Why is
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:45:34PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:25:28AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 05, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >
> > > >
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 09:29 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ram Pai wrote:
> >
> > Peter, I am not working on it currently. But i am interested in getting
> > it done. I have the seed set of patches which had Al Viro's ideas
> > incorporated. Infact those patches were sent on lkml 2 months back.
>
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:29:17PM +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> On 070621 18:19, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Johannes Schlumberger wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> >
> > Hi Johannes,
> >
> > > We (two students of CS) built a system for
201 - 300 of 979 matches
Mail list logo
