Hi David,
Would you have a chance to look at this page?
Cheers
Michael
On 11/04/2016 04:47 PM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> As part of the process of adopting the *.7 pages from
> keyutils into man-pages, I've made some significant
> extensions to the keyrings
Hi David,
Would you have a chance to look at this page?
Cheers
Michael
On 11/04/2016 04:47 PM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> As part of the process of adopting the *.7 pages from
> keyutils into man-pages, I've made some significant
> extensions to the keyrings
Hi Peter,
On 11/25/2016 05:34 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 11/25/2016 05:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 05:08:44PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> On 11/25/2016 04:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> Well that's o
Hi Peter,
On 11/25/2016 05:34 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 11/25/2016 05:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 05:08:44PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> On 11/25/2016 04:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> Well that's o
On 11/25/2016 06:50 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 09:33:50AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Serge,
>>
>> On 11/24/2016 11:52 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>> Quoting Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) (mtk.manpa...@gmail.com):
>>
On 11/25/2016 06:50 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 09:33:50AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Serge,
>>
>> On 11/24/2016 11:52 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>>> Quoting Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) (mtk.manpa...@gmail.com):
>>
On 11/25/2016 05:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 05:08:44PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 11/25/2016 04:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> Well that's one way of looking at it. So, the change
>> that I'm talking about came in 2.6.32 wi
On 11/25/2016 05:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 05:08:44PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 11/25/2016 04:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> Well that's one way of looking at it. So, the change
>> that I'm talking about came in 2.6.32 wi
Hi Peter,
On 11/25/2016 05:04 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 04:04:25PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>┌─┐
>
Hi Peter,
On 11/25/2016 05:04 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 04:04:25PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>┌─┐
>
On 11/25/2016 04:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-11-25 at 16:04 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>>>┌─┐
On 11/25/2016 04:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-11-25 at 16:04 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>>>┌─┐
On 11/25/2016 04:04 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 11/25/2016 02:02 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>>┌─┐
On 11/25/2016 04:04 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 11/25/2016 02:02 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>>┌─┐
Hi Mike,
On 11/25/2016 02:02 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:41 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>Suppose that there are two autogroups competing for the same
>>CPU. The first group contains ten CPU-bound processes from
Hi Mike,
On 11/25/2016 02:02 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 22:41 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>Suppose that there are two autogroups competing for the same
>>CPU. The first group contains ten CPU-bound processes from
On 11/25/2016 01:52 PM, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 10:41:29PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>Suppose that there are two autogroups competing for the same
>>CPU. The first group contains ten C
On 11/25/2016 01:52 PM, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 10:41:29PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>Suppose that there are two autogroups competing for the same
>>CPU. The first group contains ten C
Hi Serge,
On 11/24/2016 11:52 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) (mtk.manpa...@gmail.com):
[...]
>> Could we have a man-pages patch for this feature? Presumably for
>> user_namespaces(7) or capabilities(7).
>
> capabilities.7 doesn't actu
Hi Serge,
On 11/24/2016 11:52 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) (mtk.manpa...@gmail.com):
[...]
>> Could we have a man-pages patch for this feature? Presumably for
>> user_namespaces(7) or capabilities(7).
>
> capabilities.7 doesn't actu
ature does not group processes that are sched‐
uled under a real-time and deadline policies. Those processes
are scheduled according to the rules described earlier.
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Train
ature does not group processes that are sched‐
uled under a real-time and deadline policies. Those processes
are scheduled according to the rules described earlier.
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Train
Hi Andreas,
On 11/23/2016 11:57 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:37 AM, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
[...]
>>> ===
>>> NEW SYSTEM CALL
>>> ===
>>>
>>>
Hi Andreas,
On 11/23/2016 11:57 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:37 AM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>>
[...]
>>> ===
>>> NEW SYSTEM CALL
>>> ===
>>>
>>> The new system call is:
>>>
>>>
(strcmp(name, XATTR_NAME_CAPS) == 0) {
> + /* Write from initial user_ns will in * __vfs_setxattr_noperm()
> + * be diverted to a nscap write. But from initial user_ns we
> + * require CAP_SETFCAP targeted at init_user_ns */
> + if (current_
(strcmp(name, XATTR_NAME_CAPS) == 0) {
> + /* Write from initial user_ns will in * __vfs_setxattr_noperm()
> + * be diverted to a nscap write. But from initial user_ns we
> + * require CAP_SETFCAP targeted at init_user_ns */
> + if (current_
On 11/23/2016 06:19 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 17:05 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> I don't think we need group scheduling details, there's plenty of
>>> documentation elsewhere for those who want theory.
>>
>> Actua
On 11/23/2016 06:19 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 17:05 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> I don't think we need group scheduling details, there's plenty of
>>> documentation elsewhere for those who want theory.
>>
>> Actua
> I don't think we need group scheduling details, there's plenty of
> documentation elsewhere for those who want theory.
Actually, which documentation were you referring to here?
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linu
> I don't think we need group scheduling details, there's plenty of
> documentation elsewhere for those who want theory.
Actually, which documentation were you referring to here?
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linu
Hi Mike,
On 11/23/2016 04:33 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 14:54 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> First off, I better say that I'm not at all intimate with the details
>> of the scheduler, so bear with me...
>>
Hi Mike,
On 11/23/2016 04:33 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 14:54 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> First off, I better say that I'm not at all intimate with the details
>> of the scheduler, so bear with me...
>>
On 11/23/2016 03:12 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 14:47 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Mike,
>>
>> On 11/23/2016 11:33 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 16:59 +0100, Michael
On 11/23/2016 03:12 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 14:47 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Mike,
>>
>> On 11/23/2016 11:33 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 16:59 +0100, Michael
Hi Mike,
First off, I better say that I'm not at all intimate with the details
of the scheduler, so bear with me...
On 11/23/2016 12:39 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 16:59 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wr
Hi Mike,
First off, I better say that I'm not at all intimate with the details
of the scheduler, so bear with me...
On 11/23/2016 12:39 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 16:59 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wr
Hello Mike,
On 11/23/2016 11:33 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 16:59 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>┌─┐
>
Hello Mike,
On 11/23/2016 11:33 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 16:59 +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>┌─┐
>
> (13) FS_IOC_GETFLAGS value. These could be translated to BSD's st_flags.
> Note that the Linux IOC flags are a mess and filesystems such as Ext4
> define flags that aren't in linux/fs.h, so translation in the kernel
> may be a necessity (or, possibly, we provide the
> (13) FS_IOC_GETFLAGS value. These could be translated to BSD's st_flags.
> Note that the Linux IOC flags are a mess and filesystems such as Ext4
> define flags that aren't in linux/fs.h, so translation in the kernel
> may be a necessity (or, possibly, we provide the
─┐
│FIXME│
├─┤
│What needs to be said about autogroup and real-time │
│tasks? │
└─────┘
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; h
─┐
│FIXME│
├─┤
│What needs to be said about autogroup and real-time │
│tasks? │
└─────┘
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; h
ioctl man page certainly does not belong there.
No patches for FS_IOC_FSGETXATTR documentation came to man-pages, as
far as I know. I'll be happy to take them.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
cated.
>
> Like I said, I thought patches had been sent to Michael to lift the
> FS_IOC_FSGETXATTR documentation from this page into the official
> linux man pages package. If not, that can be chased up separately,
> but the XFS ioctl man page certainly does not belong there.
/Makefile | 10 +
> samples/statx/test-statx.c | 248 +++
> 20 files changed, 771 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 samples/statx/Makefile
> create mode 100644 samples/statx/test-statx.c
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this
les/statx/test-statx.c | 248 +++
> 20 files changed, 771 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 samples/statx/Makefile
> create mode 100644 samples/statx/test-statx.c
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "u
vincent.wea...@maine.edu>
> Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpa...@gmail.com>
> ---
> man2/perf_event_open.2 | 57
> --
> 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man2/perf_event_open.2 b/
Hello Wang Nan,
On 10/24/2016 08:52 AM, Wang Nan wrote:
> Linux 4.7 (9ecda41acb971ebd07c8fb35faf24005c0baea12) introduces write_backward
> attribute to perf_event_attr. Document this feature.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan
> Reviewed-by: Vince Weaver
> Cc: Michael Kerr
resumes the ring-buffer.
> +
> +Pausing a read only ring buffer before reading from it without having
> +to worry about data being overwritten.
That last sentence seems incomplete. I can't understand what you
mean here?
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
Hello Wang Nan,
On 10/24/2016 08:52 AM, Wang Nan wrote:
> Linux 4.7 (86e7972f690c1017fd086cdfe53d8524e68c661c) introduces
> PERF_EVENT_IOC_PAUSE_OUTPUT feature. Document it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan
> Reviewed-by: Vince Weaver
> Cc: Michael Kerrisk
> ---
> man
2.6.37
commit 864232fa1a2f8dfe003438ef0851a56722740f3e
Author: Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com>
Date: Fri Sep 3 10:42:55 2010 +0100
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
: Fri Sep 3 10:42:55 2010 +0100
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
use them.
SEE ALSO
keyutils(7), persistent-keyring(7), process-keyring(7),
session-keyring(7), thread-keyring(7), user-keyring(7),
user-session-keyring(7), pam_keyinit(8)
Linux 2016-11-01 KEYRINGS(7)
--
Michael Kerrisk, m
use them.
SEE ALSO
keyutils(7), persistent-keyring(7), process-keyring(7),
session-keyring(7), thread-keyring(7), user-keyring(7),
user-session-keyring(7), pam_keyinit(8)
Linux 2016-11-01 KEYRINGS(7)
--
Michael Kerrisk, m
Documentation/security/keys-request-key.txt.
Linux 2016-10-08REQUEST_KEY(2)
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
request_key.2
Description: Unix manual page
Documentation/security/keys-request-key.txt.
Linux 2016-10-08REQUEST_KEY(2)
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
request_key.2
Description: Unix manual page
)
The kernel source files Documentation/security/keys.txt and
Documentation/security/keys-request-key.txt.
Linux 2016-07-17ADD_KEY(2)
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
add_key.2
Description: Unix manual page
)
The kernel source files Documentation/security/keys.txt and
Documentation/security/keys-request-key.txt.
Linux 2016-07-17ADD_KEY(2)
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
add_key.2
Description: Unix manual page
2016 at 10:38:33AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Christoph, Piotr, and Brice
>>
>> Since you (Christoph and Piotr) helped with documenting MPOL_LOCAL
>> just recently, I wonder if I might ask you to review a patch that I
>> propose for the mbind(2) ma
2016 at 10:38:33AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Christoph, Piotr, and Brice
>>
>> Since you (Christoph and Piotr) helped with documenting MPOL_LOCAL
>> just recently, I wonder if I might ask you to review a patch that I
>> propose for the mbind(2) ma
e mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/active.h
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/flist.c
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/flist.h
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/pool.c
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/pool.h
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/queue.c
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/queue.h
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/.gitignore
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/Makefile
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/bus1-ioctl.h
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/test-api.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/test-io.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/test.h
>
> --
> 2.10.1
>
--
Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer;
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface", http://blog.man7.org/
1/util/active.h
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/flist.c
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/flist.h
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/pool.c
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/pool.h
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/queue.c
> create mode 100644 ipc/bus1/util/queue.h
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/.gitignore
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/Makefile
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/bus1-ioctl.h
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/test-api.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/test-io.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bus1/test.h
>
> --
> 2.10.1
>
--
Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer;
http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface", http://blog.man7.org/
On 10/21/2016 03:44 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> Did you have any thoughts on my follow-on question below?
>
> There was only one AFAICT?
>
>>> Thanks. So, are all the other cases where I changed
On 10/21/2016 03:44 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> Did you have any thoughts on my follow-on question below?
>
> There was only one AFAICT?
>
>>> Thanks. So, are all the other cases where I changed
On 10/13/2016 08:16 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> @@ -100,7 +100,10 @@ If, however, the shared memory region was created with
>> the
>> .B SHM_HUGETLB
>> flag,
>> the huge pages will be allocat
On 10/13/2016 08:16 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> @@ -100,7 +100,10 @@ If, however, the shared memory region was created with
>> the
>> .B SHM_HUGETLB
>> flag,
>> the huge pages will be allocat
ver-writable when it is mmapped readonly?
> Is this a hard requirement?
> Can you set the read-backwards bit if not mapped readonly?
Wang Nan, could you perhaps clarify this in the next version of the patch?
>
> Otherwise the documentation seems reasonable.
>
> Reviewed-by: Vince
ver-writable when it is mmapped readonly?
> Is this a hard requirement?
> Can you set the read-backwards bit if not mapped readonly?
Wang Nan, could you perhaps clarify this in the next version of the patch?
>
> Otherwise the documentation seems reasonable.
>
> Reviewed-by: Vin
Hello Wang Nan
Thanks for this patch! A few comments below.
On 10/21/2016 01:38 PM, Wang Nan wrote:
> Linux 4.7 (86e7972f690c1017fd086cdfe53d8524e68c661c) introduces
> PERF_EVENT_IOC_PAUSE_OUTPUT feature. Document it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangn...@huawei.com>
>
Hello Wang Nan
Thanks for this patch! A few comments below.
On 10/21/2016 01:38 PM, Wang Nan wrote:
> Linux 4.7 (86e7972f690c1017fd086cdfe53d8524e68c661c) introduces
> PERF_EVENT_IOC_PAUSE_OUTPUT feature. Document it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan
> Cc: Michael Kerrisk
Nan, I'll send a few wording corrections. Could you please include
Vince's reviewed by tag on your next revision?
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
ding corrections. Could you please include
Vince's reviewed by tag on your next revision?
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
_SAMPLE_BRANCH_IND_JUMP " (since Linux 4.2)"
> .\" commit c9fdfa14c3792c0160849c484e83aa57afd80ccc
> Indirect jumps.
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
irect calls.
> .TP
> +.BR PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_CALL " (since Linux 4.4)"
> +.\" commit c229bf9dc179d2023e185c0f705bdf68484c1e73
> +Direct calls.
> +.TP
> +.B PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_ANY_RETURN
> +Any return branch.
> +.TP
> .BR PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_IND_JUMP " (since Linu
Hi Vince,
On 21 October 2016 at 16:37, Vince Weaver <vincent.wea...@maine.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> Thanks for this patch, Wangnan.
>>
>> Vince, do you have any comments?
>>
>
> I was catchi
Hi Vince,
On 21 October 2016 at 16:37, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>> Thanks for this patch, Wangnan.
>>
>> Vince, do you have any comments?
>>
>
> I was catching up chronologically and was still at 4
r \-1 if
> output should be ignored.
> +
> +Two events with different
> +.IR write_backward
> +settings are not allowed to be connected together using
> +.B PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_OUTPUT.
> +.B EINVAL
> +is returned in this case.
> .TP
> .BR PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_FILTER " (since Linux 2.6.33)"
> .\" commit 6fb2915df7f0747d9044da9dbff5b46dc2e20830
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
> Starting with Linux 3.4 on x86, you can use the
> .\" commit c7206205d00ab375839bd6c7ddb247d600693c09
> @@ -2693,6 +2739,13 @@ The file descriptors must all be on the same CPU.
>
> The argument specifies the desired file descriptor, or \-1 if
> output should be ignor
er.
> .SS Using prctl
> A process can enable or disable all the event groups that are
> attached to it using the
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
g prctl
> A process can enable or disable all the event groups that are
> attached to it using the
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
Hi Wangnan
On 10/21/2016 09:13 AM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
>
>
> On 2016/10/21 15:06, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Wangnan,
>>
>> The patch below seems to have landed in Linux 4.7,
>> commit 86e7972f690c1017fd086cdfe53d8524e68c661c
>&g
Hi Wangnan
On 10/21/2016 09:13 AM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
>
>
> On 2016/10/21 15:06, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> Hello Wangnan,
>>
>> The patch below seems to have landed in Linux 4.7,
>> commit 86e7972f690c1017fd086cdfe53d8524e68c661c
>&g
Hi Christoph,
Did you have any thoughts on my follow-on question below?
Cheers,
Michael
On 10/14/2016 12:09 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> On 13 October 2016 at 20:16, Christoph Lameter <c...@linux.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Micha
Hi Christoph,
Did you have any thoughts on my follow-on question below?
Cheers,
Michael
On 10/14/2016 12:09 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> On 13 October 2016 at 20:16, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (m
t;> Can you also do a patch to the man-pages?
>>
>>http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/perf_event_open.2.html
>
> Sure.
>
> I think I need to provide a patch for:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git
>
> But which one should be
t;> Can you also do a patch to the man-pages?
>>
>>http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/perf_event_open.2.html
>
> Sure.
>
> I think I need to provide a patch for:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git
>
> But which one should be
> delta = time_offset + quot * time_mult +
> ((rem * time_mult) >> time_shift);
> .fi
> @@ -1664,7 +1664,7 @@ And vice versa:
>
> .nf
> quot = cyc >> time_shift;
> -rem = cyc & ((1 << time_shift) - 1);
> +rem = cyc &
time_mult +
> ((rem * time_mult) >> time_shift);
> .fi
> @@ -1664,7 +1664,7 @@ And vice versa:
>
> .nf
> quot = cyc >> time_shift;
> -rem = cyc & ((1 << time_shift) - 1);
> +rem = cyc & (((u64)1 << time_shift) - 1
permissions so CAP_SYS_NICE tasks can migrate other tasks between
> cgroups.
>
> I feel the approach taken there overloads CAP_SYS_NICE a bit much,
> and is maybe more complicated then needed.
>
> So this patch, as suggested by Michael Kerrisk, simply adds a
> check for
permissions so CAP_SYS_NICE tasks can migrate other tasks between
> cgroups.
>
> I feel the approach taken there overloads CAP_SYS_NICE a bit much,
> and is maybe more complicated then needed.
>
> So this patch, as suggested by Michael Kerrisk, simply adds a
> check for
ers,
Michael
> +is optional; if not supported, those
> values will be 0.
>
> The type of branches recorded is specified by the
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
onal; if not supported, those
> values will be 0.
>
> The type of branches recorded is specified by the
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
On 10/19/2016 05:14 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>> diff --git a/man2/perf_event_open.2 b/man2/perf_event_open.2
>>> index 68b99bb..04a0cf5 100644
>>> +.B PERF_RECORD_SWITCH_CPU_WIDE
>>&g
On 10/19/2016 05:14 PM, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>
>>> diff --git a/man2/perf_event_open.2 b/man2/perf_event_open.2
>>> index 68b99bb..04a0cf5 100644
>>> +.B PERF_RECORD_SWITCH_CPU_WIDE
>>&g
Hi John,
On 10/18/2016 06:54 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> <mtk.manpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi John,
>>
>> On 18 October 2016 at 01:35, John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon
Hi John,
On 10/18/2016 06:54 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> wrote:
>> Hi John,
>>
>> On 18 October 2016 at 01:35, John Stultz wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Andy Lutomirski
>>> w
was a context switch into
> +or away from the current process.
> +
> +.in +4n
> +.nf
> +struct {
> +struct perf_event_header header;
> +u32 next_prev_pid;
> +u32 next_prev_tid;
> +struct sample_id sample_id;
> +};
> +.fi
> +.RS
> +.TP
> +.I next_prev_pid
> +The process id of the previous (if switching in)
> +or next (if switching out) process on the CPU.
> +.TP
> +.I next_prev_tid
> +The thread id of the previous (if switching in)
> +or next (if switching out) thread on the CPU.
> +.RE
> .RE
> .SS Overflow handling
> Events can be set to notify when a threshold is crossed,
>
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
t; +or away from the current process.
> +
> +.in +4n
> +.nf
> +struct {
> +struct perf_event_header header;
> + u32 next_prev_pid;
> +u32 next_prev_tid;
> +struct sample_id sample_id;
> +};
> +.fi
> +.RS
> +.TP
> +.I next_prev_pid
> +The process id of the previous (if switching in)
> +or next (if switching out) process on the CPU.
> +.TP
> +.I next_prev_tid
> +The thread id of the previous (if switching in)
> +or next (if switching out) thread on the CPU.
> +.RE
> .RE
> .SS Overflow handling
> Events can be set to notify when a threshold is crossed,
>
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
s operation so unique, or is there an existing silo (not
CAP_SYS_ADMIN) that we can re-use? I ask, because we currently use 38
silos out of a possible 64 capabilities, and when everyone chooses
single-use capabilities, we will quickly exhaust the silos.
I'm not saying that creating a new capability here is wrong, but it is
worth further considering the existing silos to see if there is one
that is a suitable match.
Looking at http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/capabilities.7.html
throws up the following possibilities:
CAP_SYS_NICE
CAP_SYS_PTRACE
CAP_SYS_RESOURCE
I'm aware that you said above that use CAP_SYS_NICE overloads that
capability a bit too much. Maybe it's true, but on the other hand, by
my count from dome rough grepping of the kernel source, there are a
total of 14 capable() checks for CAP_SYS_NICE, out of a total of
around 1256 capable() checks altogether. So, I think this does need to
be balanced against the limited number of silos.
Also, CAP_SYS_RESOURCE deserves consideration (34 uses in capable()
checks). I'd say, since cgroups are about resources, so there's
something of a match there., so it's also worth considering.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
when everyone chooses
single-use capabilities, we will quickly exhaust the silos.
I'm not saying that creating a new capability here is wrong, but it is
worth further considering the existing silos to see if there is one
that is a suitable match.
Looking at http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/capabilities.7.html
throws up the following possibilities:
CAP_SYS_NICE
CAP_SYS_PTRACE
CAP_SYS_RESOURCE
I'm aware that you said above that use CAP_SYS_NICE overloads that
capability a bit too much. Maybe it's true, but on the other hand, by
my count from dome rough grepping of the kernel source, there are a
total of 14 capable() checks for CAP_SYS_NICE, out of a total of
around 1256 capable() checks altogether. So, I think this does need to
be balanced against the limited number of silos.
Also, CAP_SYS_RESOURCE deserves consideration (34 uses in capable()
checks). I'd say, since cgroups are about resources, so there's
something of a match there., so it's also worth considering.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
701 - 800 of 2778 matches
Mail list logo
