Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 0/4] /proc/thread-self

2014-08-01 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > This patchset implements /proc/thread-self a magic symlink that > solves a couple of problems. shouldn't we keep the 'task' in the name, as it points into the 'task' directory? And why not mimic the current 'self -> ' ideom under /proc/

Re: [PATCH 2/6] typesafe: kthread_create and kthread_run

2008-01-20 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Jan 20, 2008 11:04 PM, Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 21 January 2008 03:43:40 Bert Wesarg wrote: > > No, it is a matter of conforming to C99 or to GNU extensions. > > Hi Bert! > > Not sure I see the point of your message. > > The original

Re: [PATCH 2/6] typesafe: kthread_create and kthread_run

2008-01-20 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Jan 20, 2008 5:24 PM, Johannes Weiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > "Bert Wesarg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Jan 20, 2008 12:25 PM, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> On Jan 20 2008 20:48, Rusty

Re: [PATCH 2/6] typesafe: kthread_create and kthread_run

2008-01-20 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Jan 20, 2008 12:25 PM, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 20 2008 20:48, Rusty Russell wrote: > >+ */ > >+#define kthread_create(threadfn, data, namefmt...) ({ \ > >+ int (*_threadfn)(typeof(data)) = (threadfn);\ > >+ __kthread_create((void *)_thre

Re: getcpu after sched_setaffinity

2007-05-12 Thread Bert Wesarg
ot related to this problem, but may I ask why the libc don't use[1] the linux/getcpu.h header to get the opaque struct vgetcpu_cache? Thank You Bert Wesarg [1]: http://sourceware.org/ml/glibc-cvs/2007-q2/msg00098.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kern

Re: [RFC 1/3] SLUB: slab_ops instead of constructors / destructors

2007-05-06 Thread Bert Wesarg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > + if (ctor || dtor) { > + so = kzalloc(sizeof(struct slab_ops), GFP_KERNEL); > + so->ctor = ctor; > + so->dtor = dtor; > + } > + return __kmem_cache_create(s, size, align, flags, so); Is this a me

[PTACH] kernel/params.c: fix lying comment for param_array()

2007-04-02 Thread Bert Wesarg
From: Bert Wesarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This fixes the comment for the function param_array. Which lies that it only *temporarily* mangle the input string @val. Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- PS: please CC me, because i'm not subscripted to this list kerne

Re: [PATCH] kernel/param.c: don't use .max when .num is NULL in param_array_set()

2005-03-29 Thread Bert Wesarg
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Sun, 2005-03-27 at 14:57 +0200, Bert Wesarg wrote: > > Hello, > > > > there seems to be a bug, at least for me, in kernel/param.c for arrays > > with .num == NULL. If .num == NULL, the function param_array_set() use

[PATCH] fix module_param_string() calls

2005-03-27 Thread Bert Wesarg
Hello, this patch fix 3 calls to module_param_string() in driver/media/video/tuner-core.c and drivers/media/video/tda9887.c. In all three places, the len and the perm parameter was switched. Patch is against 2.6.12-rc1. Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> diff -uprN linux-2.6.

[PATCH] kernel/param.c: don't use .max when .num is NULL in param_array_set()

2005-03-27 Thread Bert Wesarg
example/parameters/array $ dmesg | tail -n 1 kernel: array: can take only 3 arguments Patch is against 2.6.12-rc1. Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/kernel/params.c 2005-03-27 14:44:00.0 +0200 +++ linux-2.6.12-rc1/kernel/params.c2005-03