On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:24:42AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> [ The Cc: list scares me. Should probably trim it. ]
Trim away! ;-)
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:31:25PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > >>How does the compiler know that m
--- Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 14:05:23, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > In this new system setfacl, chmod, chown, and
> chgrp all go away
> > except inside of an emulation layer. File and
> directories no longer
> > have permissions. People have permission to naming
Well if there is only one memory location involved, then smp_rmb()
isn't
going to really do anything anyway, so it would be incorrect to use
it.
rmb() orders *any* two reads; that includes two reads from the same
location.
If the two reads are to the same location, all CPUs I am aware of
will
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:30:05PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 03:34:25PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> >>Maybe it is the safe way to go, but it does obscure cases where there
> >>is a real need for barriers.
> >
> >
> >I prefer burying barriers i
On Aug 15, 2007, at 15:26:07, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
When one thinks outside the box one has to think about evolving
beyond what you are used to. When I moved
beyond DOS I have to give up the idea of 8.3 file names. The idea
here i
On 8/15/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to throw out some concepts about a new way of
> thinking about file systems. But the first thing you
> have to do is to forget what you know about file
> systems now. This is a discussion about a new view of
> looking a file storage that i
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> BTW I suspect this is true for some other GFP_DMA usages too.
> Some driver writers seem to confuse it with the PCI DMA
> APIs or believe it is always needed for them.
See especially ARM.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-k
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 09:46:55PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>Well if there is only one memory location involved, then smp_rmb()
> >>>isn't
> >>>going to really do anything anyway, so it would be incorrect to use
> >>>it.
> >>
> >>rmb() orders *any* two reads; that includes two reads fr
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
> LDD3 says on page 125: "The following operations are defined for the
> type [atomic_t] and are guaranteed to be atomic with respect to all
> processors of an SMP computer."
>
> Doesn't "atomic WRT all processors" require volatility?
Atomic operations
(trimmed Cc)
Satyam Sharma wrote:
> [PATCH] ieee1394: Fix kthread stopping in nodemgr_host_thread
>
> The nodemgr host thread can exit on its own even when kthread_should_stop
> is not true, on receiving a signal (might never happen in practice, as
> it ignores signals). But considering kthread_s
On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 19:11 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Can you try this patch?
Thanks, Christoph
It worked fine, both for normal kernel and for dump kernel on Cell. Is
this patch intended to go mainline?
>
> From 74863f472810cb58dc56dde050616581d38f7673 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: C
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:38:23 -0400 Jiri Slaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Ok. I was just curious, why did you CC drm people for char drivers
>changes.
>
>BTW. is there anybody on janitors list, who collects all those
>patches and
>forwards them upstream?
>
The "MAINTAINERS" list claims that t
Hi Jesper,
On 8/9/07, Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> EHLO,
>
> If, in em28xx_usb_probe() the memory allocation
> dev->alt_max_pkt_size = kmalloc(32*
> dev->num_alt,GFP_KERNEL);
> fails, then we'll bail out and return -ENOMEM.
> The prob
Well if there is only one memory location involved, then smp_rmb()
isn't
going to really do anything anyway, so it would be incorrect to use
it.
rmb() orders *any* two reads; that includes two reads from the same
location.
If the two reads are to the same location, all CPUs I am aware of
will
[ The Cc: list scares me. Should probably trim it. ]
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:31:25PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > >>How does the compiler know that msleep() has got barrier()s?
> > >
> > >Because msleep_interruptible() is in a separate co
Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not suggesting something like [EMAIL PROTECTED] with something
> like majordomo allowing to add yourself to those,
Why not
> but something less
> extreme in that direction might be worth thinking about... Hell,
> even simple
> $ finger fs/minix/[EMAIL P
Scott Thompson napsal(a):
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:30:14 -0400 Jiri Slaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> why [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
> David Airlie was listed as the owner on several of the files and in
> maintainers for "DRM", which was my best to: guess for
> /drivers/char/drm (which was patc
Scott Thompson napsal(a):
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:17:29 -0400 Jiri Slaby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/char/sx.c b/drivers/char/sx.c
>>> index 85a2328..30829ed 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/char/sx.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/char/sx.c
>>> @@ -2627,6 +2627,12 @@ static void __devinit f
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > "Volatile behaviour" itself isn't consistently defined (at least
> > definitely not consistently implemented in various gcc versions across
> > platforms),
>
> It should be consistent across platforms; if not, file a bug please.
>
> > but it i
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> When one thinks outside the box one has to think about
> evolving beyond what you are used to. When I moved
> beyond DOS I have to give up the idea of 8.3 file
> names. The idea here is to come up with a model that
> can emulate the exi
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:09:31AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Yep - way outside the box - and thus the title of the
> thread.
>
> The idea is that people have permissions - not files.
> By people I mean users, groups, managers, applications
> etc. One might even specify that there are no
> permis
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:51:58PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >Well if there is only one memory location involved, then smp_rmb()
> >isn't
> >going to really do anything anyway, so it would be incorrect to use it.
>
> rmb() orders *any* two reads; that includes two reads from the same
> l
On Wednesday 15 August 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So... I still think blacklisting the VIA controllers from this CPU
> frequency stuff is the best option.
Sadly, yes. My negative impression of VIA quality is confirmed,
yet again...
Please make sure the comments in your blacklist code des
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:25:05PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:17:29PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > No, I'd actually prefer something like what Christoph Lameter suggested,
> > > i.e. users
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:31:25PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>How does the compiler know that msleep() has got barrier()s?
> >
> >Because msleep_interruptible() is in a separate compilation unit,
> >the compiler has to assume that it might modify any arbitrary global.
>
> No; compilation
Well if there is only one memory location involved, then smp_rmb()
isn't
going to really do anything anyway, so it would be incorrect to use it.
rmb() orders *any* two reads; that includes two reads from the same
location.
Consider that smp_rmb basically will do anything from flushing the
pip
HI
While I find your ideas intriguing, I'd like to offer a friendly
suggestion: You're never going to convince anyone on LKML unless you do
the following things:
* Describe your idea in detail, including algorithms, pseudo code,
pictures, or whatever. Vague hand-wavey stuff won't do it.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:30:19AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> --- Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Except they do, and without directories the
> > performance of your average filesystem is going to suck.
>
> Actually you would get a speed improvement. You hash
> the full name and get t
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:19:57PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Let's turn this around. Can you give a single example where
> > the volatile semantics is needed in a legitimate way?
>
> Accessing H/W registers? But apart from that...
Communicating b
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 01:55:37PM -0400, Chris Snook wrote:
> For architectures whose maintainers aren't worried and whose
> developers/users aren't bothered enough to submit an inline assembly
> patch, I'll just keep the inlines with the *(volatile foo *)& casts,
> unless of course ISO clarifi
Hi Thomas,
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:03:24 +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> I saw recent Lindentation patches for pnp. I expect they came in after
> -rc2?
> This one is against 2.6.23-rc2 and might not patch with latest git
> repository changes then.
It applied fine on top of 2.6.23-rc3-git1.
I've
"Volatile behaviour" itself isn't consistently defined (at least
definitely not consistently implemented in various gcc versions across
platforms),
It should be consistent across platforms; if not, file a bug please.
but it is /expected/ to mean something like: "ensure that
every such access a
Hayes, Stuart wrote:
> David Brownell wrote:
>>> Hm... I've got a 0.95. I'll try to get a Via EHCI 1.00 controller
>>> and make sure it's the same problem.
>>
>> Yeah, for some reason way too many of the add-on PCI cards with VIA
>> chips use that pretty-broken VT6202 chip. Ones with VT6212 are
We (the -stable team) are announcing the release of the 2.6.22.3 kernel.
This release has a few bugfixes so all users of the 2.6.22 series are
encouraged to update to it. Especially people with laptops, they will
appreciate the power savings in this release.
I'll also be replying to this message
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 1f50543..bc2d377 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
VERSION = 2
PATCHLEVEL = 6
SUBLEVEL = 22
-EXTRAVERSION = .2
+EXTRAVERSION = .3
NAME = Holy Dancing Manatees, Batman!
# *DOCUMENTATION*
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_parse.c b/
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:00:29 -0400
Lee Schermerhorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 12:12 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Paul Jackson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > Lee wrote:
> > > > [altho' methinks CPUSET should select CONTAINERS rather than
> > > > depend on it...]
>
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's turn this around. Can you give a single example where
> the volatile semantics is needed in a legitimate way?
Accessing H/W registers? But apart from that...
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bod
On Aug 4, 10:15 pm, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-08-04 at 12:47 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 4 Aug 2007, Jörn Engel wrote:
>
> > > Given the choice between only "atime" and "noatime" I'd agree with you.
> > > Heck, I use it myself. But "relatime" seems t
On Aug 15, 2007, at 14:05:23, Marc Perkel wrote:
In this new system setfacl, chmod, chown, and chgrp all go away
except inside of an emulation layer. File and directories no longer
have permissions. People have permission to naming patterns. So if
you put a file into a tree or move a tree th
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Only caveat, is that it has to be done before smp gets in the game, and
> with interrupts disabled. (which makes the function in vsmp.c not eligible).
>
> My current option is to force VSMP to use PARAVIRT, as said before, and
> then fill
Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 12:28 -0700, Mitchell Erblich wrote:
> > Group, Ingo Molnar, etc,
> >
> > Why does the rt sched_class contain fewer elements than fair?
> > missing is the RT for .task_new.
>
> No class specific initialization needs to be done for RT tasks.
>
>
Hi all,
I'm writing a module that can do a dynamic isolcpus at run time. This is
much easier to do in the kernel than in userspace. In order to do this,
I need to iterate over all tasks in the system but I could not find a
way to do this from a module.
So instead of exporting the tasklist_lock (
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 22:22 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:31:42AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 09:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 12:12 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Paul Jackson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Lee wrote:
> > > [altho' methinks CPUSET should select CONTAINERS rather than
> > > depend on it...]
> >
> > Good point -- what do you think, Paul Menage?
>
> Paul mentioned (http://www.spini
Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> This is hopefully the last iteration of the pvops64 patch.
>
> From the last version, we have only one change, which is
> include/asm-x86_64/processor.h: There were still one survivor in raw asm.
> Also, git screwed me up for some reason, and the 25th patch was m
Kyle,
In this new system setfacl, chmod, chown, and chgrp
all go away except inside of an emulation layer. File
and directories no longer have permissions. People
have permission to naming patterns. So if you put a
file into a tree or move a tree then those who have
permissions to the tree have ac
--- Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 13:19:16, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > One of the problems with the Unix/Linux world is
> that your minds
> > are locked into this one model. In order to do it
> right it requires
> > the mental discipline to break out of that.
>
>
In the fallout from the recent atomic_t volatility discussions, patches
have been posted to moot the compiler correctness issues by implementing
atomic[64]_[read|set] in inline assembly on powerpc, i386, and x86_64.
While I personally don't consider such implementations to be critically
necessa
On Aug 15, 2007, at 13:34:44, Phillip Susi wrote:
The problem that I have with this setup is that it specifies an ACL
on EACH file. Yes, you can set a default on the directory for
newly created files, but what if I want to add a user to the access
list for that whole directory? I have to i
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:48:28PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > [...]
> > Not for i386 and x86_64 -- those have atomic ops without any "volatile"
> > semantics (currently as per existing definitions).
>
> I claim unit volumes with arm, and the m
--- Phillip Susi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > Going even further in this direction, the
> following POSIX ACL on the
> > directories will do what you want:
> >
> > ## Note: file owner and group are kmoffett
> > u::rw-
> > g::rw-
> > u:lsorens:rw-
> > u:mtharp:rw-
> > u:m
--- Michael Tharp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marc Perkel wrote:
> > That not a problem - it's a feature. In such a
> > situation the person would get a general file
> creation
> > error.
>
> Feature or not, it's still vulnerable to probing by
> malicious users. If
> there are create permission
Hello all,
I have been using linux-2.6.16.24 for development.
However, when I boot a sustem that uses a Dell USB
keyboard with a hub built into a Dell monitor, there
are continuous keyboard disconnect messages until
I exercise ^S/^Q. Then, everything is fine. I
thought maybe there was a bug that
Hi Paul,
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:17:29PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > [...]
> > No, I'd actually prefer something like what Christoph Lameter suggested,
> > i.e. users (such as above) who want "volatile"-like behaviour from atomic
> > ops can
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 09:08 -0500, Pat Gefre wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Joe Perches wrote:
> + On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 11:19 +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> + > I suggest to add a separate
> + > MAINTAINERS entry for ioc3_serial with Patrick Gefre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> as the
> + > maintainer.
> + P
On 08/14/2007 04:41 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> (added Arjan to CC, as he has been working on the kernel part of the
> randomization previously)
>
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> If I'm reading the above hunk correctly, this means we will randomize
>> all PIEs and even all dynamic
The calculation of pgoff in do_linear_fault() should use PAGE_SHIFT and not
PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT since vma->vm_pgoff is in units of PAGE_SIZE and not
PAGE_CACHE_SIZE. At the moment linux/pagemap.h has PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT defined
as PAGE_SHIFT, but should that ever change this calculation would break.
Sig
On Aug 15, 2007, at 13:19:16, Marc Perkel wrote:
One of the problems with the Unix/Linux world is that your minds
are locked into this one model. In order to do it right it requires
the mental discipline to break out of that.
The major thing that you are missing is that this "one model" has
Kyle Moffett wrote:
Going even further in this direction, the following POSIX ACL on the
directories will do what you want:
## Note: file owner and group are kmoffett
u::rw-
g::rw-
u:lsorens:rw-
u:mtharp:rw-
u:mperkel:rw-
g:randomcvsdudes:r-
default:u::rw-
default:g::rw-
default:u:lsorens
defau
--- Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 13:09:31, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > The idea is that people have permissions - not
> files. By people I
> > mean users, groups, managers, applications
> > etc. One might even specify that there are no
> permission
> > restriction
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 10:48:28PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:33:36PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:25:16AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Do we really need another set of API
Marc Perkel wrote:
> That not a problem - it's a feature. In such a
> situation the person would get a general file creation
> error.
Feature or not, it's still vulnerable to probing by malicious users. If
there are create permissions on the directory, the invisibility is not
perfect.
> Although
--- Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
.
>
> > The important point here is that directories don't
> really exist.
>
> Except they do, and without directories the
> performance of your
> average filesystem is going to suck.
>
Actually you would get a speed improvement. You hash
the full
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 01:21:37AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> The following patch fixes the brk-allocation problems on x86_64 with code
> randomization patch on PIE-compiled binaries. Is anyone aware of any
> potential disaster it might cause somewhere please?
(Adding myself to this thread
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 19:07 +0200, Rudolf Marek wrote:
> There is documentation file too. Documentation/hwmon/coretemp
Thanks. I've now got:
CORETEMP HARDWARE MONITORING DRIVER
P: Rudolf Marek
M: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
L: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
S: Maintained
F: Documentation/hwmon
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 13:44 +0200, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 08/15/2007 11:39 AM, Stefan Richter wrote:
> > Note, maintainer contacts
> > - should be available to patch submitters and
> > - must be available to *problem reporters*
> > without having to have git and a .git repo.
> That "must" seem
Guy Streeter wrote:
> On 6/1/06, James Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> I think this is the wrong approach.
>>>
>>> Many of these should probably be converted to seq_file, but in the
>>> particular case of environ, the right approach is to observe the fact
>>> that re
Am Mittwoch, 15. August 2007 18:49:07 schrieben Sie:
> Linux kernel version 2.6.22.3 has been released. It is available from:
> ...
> The following files were changed in this release:
>
> Makefile |2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
Obviously something went wrong.
-
To u
On Aug 15, 2007, at 13:09:31, Marc Perkel wrote:
The idea is that people have permissions - not files. By people I
mean users, groups, managers, applications
etc. One might even specify that there are no permission
restrictions at all. Part of the process would be that the kernel
load what
--- Kyle Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 12:02:41, Marc Perkel wrote:
> > Kyle, thinking further outside the box, files
> would no longer have
> > owners or permissions. Nor would
> > directories. People, groups, managers, and other
> objects with have
> > permission
One note before you read the rest of this:
The kinds of things you are discussing here are usually called
"MAC" or "Mandatory Access Control", and they are always implemented
on top of an LSM *after* ordinary "DAC" or "Discretionary Access
Control" (IE: file permissions) are applied. If y
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 10:36 -0400, Jeff Dike wrote:
> Looks fine, but add
> F:fs/hostfs/
> F:fs/hppfs/
Thanks, I've now got:
USER-MODE LINUX
P: Jeff Dike
M: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
L: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
L: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net
S:
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 02:42:47PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> I found a type mismatch in UML that makes host block devices unusable as ubd
> devices on x86_64 and other 64 bits systems (segfault of the mm subsystem):
Looks sane, can I have a properly Signed-off-by: version of the patch?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
There is documentation file too. Documentation/hwmon/coretemp
Rudolf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGwzLV3J9wPJqZRNURAgdmAJ9az/Zm2rq1k+sxwivhS
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:02:41 PDT, Marc Perkel said:
>
> > Kyle, thinking further outside the box, files
> would no
> > longer have owners or permissions. Nor would
> > directories. People, groups, managers, and other
> > objects with have permissions.
>
> You gott
Quoting Paul Jackson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Lee wrote:
> > [altho' methinks CPUSET should select CONTAINERS rather than
> > depend on it...]
>
> Good point -- what do you think, Paul Menage?
Paul mentioned (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-containers/msg03775.html)
that he was asked not to use
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:33:36PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:25:16AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > Do we really need another set of APIs? Can you give even one example
> > > where the pre-existing volatil
Quoting Dhaval Giani ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:31:42AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 09:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > > > On
--- alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> > For example. If you list a directory you only see
> the
> > files that you have some rights to and files where
> you
> > have no rights are invisible to you. If a file is
> read
> > only to you then you can't del
Herbert Xu wrote:
Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My config with march=pentium-m and gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 (Gentoo 4.1.2):
textdata bss dec hex filename
3434150 249176 176128 3859454 3ae3fe atomic_normal/vmlinux
3435308 249176 176128 3860612 3ae884 atomic_inlineasm/vmlinu
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:09:35PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> > Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:05:38PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > >>> I don't know if this here is affected:
> >
> > [...something like]
> > b = atomic
Chris Wright escreveu:
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
As alternatives what we have now, we can either keep the paravirt_ops as
it is now for the native case, just hooking the vsmp functions in place
of the normal one, (there are just three ops anyway), refill the
paravi
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:31:42AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 09:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > > On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 14:56 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:02:41 PDT, Marc Perkel said:
> Kyle, thinking further outside the box, files would no
> longer have owners or permissions. Nor would
> directories. People, groups, managers, and other
> objects with have permissions.
You gotta think *way* out of the box to come up with a sy
On Aug 15, 2007, at 12:02:41, Marc Perkel wrote:
Kyle, thinking further outside the box, files would no longer have
owners or permissions. Nor would
directories. People, groups, managers, and other objects with have
permissions. One might tag a file with the object that created it
so you co
On 6/1/06, James Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > I think this is the wrong approach.
> >
> > Many of these should probably be converted to seq_file, but in the
> > particular case of environ, the right approach is to observe the fact
> > that reading environ is just l
> Subject : konqueror suddenly vanishing, "konqueror: Fatal IO
error: client killed"
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/7/22/86
> Last known good : ?
> Submitter : Markus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Caused-By : ?
> Handled-By : Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Status
Casey Schaufler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Could you describe how this compares to the proposal that the
> AppArmor developers suggested recently? I expect that we can
> reduce the amount of discussion required, and maybe avoid some
> confusion if you could do that.
I don't know what that i
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> As alternatives what we have now, we can either keep the paravirt_ops as
> it is now for the native case, just hooking the vsmp functions in place
> of the normal one, (there are just three ops anyway), refill the
> paravirt_ops entirely i
> Maybe we could even make VSMP depend on PARAVIRT, to make it sure it is
> completely a paravirt client.
That's the right thing to do I think. Remove the existing ifdefs
and hook vsmp in only using paravirt ops.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
I tried running a D-link gig card on kernel 2.6.21.1
and it came up fine, but when I did a sftp of
an linux dvd ISO to it, the interface would lock
up hard with the error
eth1: hw csum failure.
Call Trace:
[]
__skb_checksum_complete_head+0x46/0x5f
[] __skb_checksum_complete+0xc/0x11
[] tc
--- Michael Tharp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > Basically any newly-created item in such a
> directory will get the
> > permissions described by the "default:" entries in
> the ACL, and
> > subdirectories will get a copy of said "default:"
> entries.
>
> This would work we
+ printk(KERN_INFO "Building NUMA distance from ACPI 2.0 SLIT\n");
This printk just looks like noise during boot. Surely this
is normal behavior on a NUMA system?
+ printk(KERN_INFO "No SLIT table, defaulting NUMA distance\n");
But this one deserves more prominence than just KERN_IN
Serge wrote:
> Paul, is the mems stuff in cpusets only really useful for NUMA cases?
I haven't been following this closely, but offhand, my take is that:
1) CONFIG_CPUSETS is primarily useful on SMP or NUMA systems.
2) It can be configured on non-NUMA systems (it still seems to
need CONF
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:01:49 -0500
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 04:13 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > > If a scsi_device supports async notification for media change, then
> > > let user space know this capability exists by cre
Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 09:31 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Lee Schermerhorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 14:56 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Ok
--- Stephen Smalley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 08:53 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> > --- David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Casey Schaufler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > With Smack you can leave the label alone, raise CAP_MAC_OVERRIDE,
> > >
Lee wrote:
> [altho' methinks CPUSET should select CONTAINERS rather than
> depend on it...]
Good point -- what do you think, Paul Menage?
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1
Hi Ingo,
I played a bit with renicing my (mostly) CPU bound jobs and found
somewhat strange behaviour.
I'm on 2.6.22.2-cfs-v19.1 -- I can't boot into 2.6.23-rc3 as part of
my daily work because my NVIDIA driver doesn't yet work with it though
I could try to do some X-less testing if need be.
I'm
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:09:35PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 08:05:38PM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> >>> I don't know if this here is affected:
>
> [...something like]
> b = atomic_read(a);
> for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
>
201 - 300 of 502 matches
Mail list logo
