,
Justin
Andrew Morton wrote:
Justin Schoeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK - I have the patch working now, but there seems to be a flaw in the
address reporting. When I look up the reported address in
/proc/kallsyms, then look in the objdump of the module, the reported
adress _does_not_
wrote:
Justin Schoeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am having a problem with memory leaking on a patched kernel. In order
to pinpoint the leak, I would like to try to trace the allocation points
for the memory.
I have found some vague references to patches that allow the user to
dump the
,
Justin
Andrew Morton wrote:
Justin Schoeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK - I have the patch working now, but there seems to be a flaw in the
address reporting. When I look up the reported address in
/proc/kallsyms, then look in the objdump of the module, the reported
adress _does_not_ point
wrote:
Justin Schoeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am having a problem with memory leaking on a patched kernel. In order
to pinpoint the leak, I would like to try to trace the allocation points
for the memory.
I have found some vague references to patches that allow the user to
dump the caller
find the
patch itself.
Can anybody please point me in the right direction - either for that
patch, or any other way to track down leaking slabs?
Thank you,
Justin Schoeman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTE
find the
patch itself.
Can anybody please point me in the right direction - either for that
patch, or any other way to track down leaking slabs?
Thank you,
Justin Schoeman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
Hi everybody,
I would just like to find out if there is any real reason why there are
no memory management functions for handling vmalloc()ed memory. If you
have a look at bttv.c, you will see definitions of:
kvirt_to_pa (translate a vmalloc()ed address to a page number)
rvmalloc (malloc and
Hi everybody,
I would just like to find out if there is any real reason why there are
no memory management functions for handling vmalloc()ed memory. If you
have a look at bttv.c, you will see definitions of:
kvirt_to_pa (translate a vmalloc()ed address to a page number)
rvmalloc (malloc and
With the VIA chipset you should use the "triton1=1" module option.
(Well, at least it worked for me!)
-justin
Hans Freitag wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> [1.] One line summary of the problem:
> bttv crashes kernel 2.4.0testX on a Vodoo3 2000
>
> [2.] Full description of the problem/report:
>
With the VIA chipset you should use the "triton1=1" module option.
(Well, at least it worked for me!)
-justin
Hans Freitag wrote:
Hi,
[1.] One line summary of the problem:
bttv crashes kernel 2.4.0testX on a Vodoo3 2000
[2.] Full description of the problem/report:
If
> Joe Woodward wrote:
>
> I am trying to use removable EIDE hard disks on a Red Hat Linux 6.1
> machine, for backup / walknet purposes.
>
> Issuing a BLKRRPART ioctl call immediately after changing the disk
> works, but only if the new disk is no larger than the disk present at
> boot time
Joe Woodward wrote:
I am trying to use removable EIDE hard disks on a Red Hat Linux 6.1
machine, for backup / walknet purposes.
Issuing a BLKRRPART ioctl call immediately after changing the disk
works, but only if the new disk is no larger than the disk present at
boot time (smaller and
Linus Torvalds wrote:
...snip...
>
> Anyway, I didn't realize you were talking about the sound drivers use of
> remap_page_range(). That's not the original reason for remap_page_range()
> at all, and in fact it's the _ugly_ way to do things. It's simple and it
> works, but it's not pretty.
>
>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
...snip...
Anyway, I didn't realize you were talking about the sound drivers use of
remap_page_range(). That's not the original reason for remap_page_range()
at all, and in fact it's the _ugly_ way to do things. It's simple and it
works, but it's not pretty.
Quite
Hi everybody,
A bit of a newbie question. A while ago I was looking through the
available web resources for information on the various malloc()'s for
drivers.
The one I did find (I just can't remember what it was called) stated
that for kmalloc(), the size must be (PAGE_SIZE-x)*2^i, where x is
Hi everybody,
A bit of a newbie question. A while ago I was looking through the
available web resources for information on the various malloc()'s for
drivers.
The one I did find (I just can't remember what it was called) stated
that for kmalloc(), the size must be (PAGE_SIZE-x)*2^i, where x is
16 matches
Mail list logo
