Can anybody on tell me whatever there are still
serious pitfalls in running Oracle-8.1.6.1R2 on the
current testing version of the 2.4 kernel series?
If I rememeber correctly there where some problems with
SHM handling still left to resolve...
Thank's in advance for any response!
-
To unsubscribe
The attached patch does the following:
1. Merge the most current version (aka: 1.08) of the
MegaRAID driver from AMI in to the most current kernel
(2.4.0-test10 and friends).
2. Try to be clever about HP NetRaid controllers used in
HP LHR4 and LHR3 boxes. The current driver does initial
Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> dalecki wrote:
> > -#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE > 0x020024
> > #include
> > -#endif
>
> *cheer*
I missd this point...
>
> > -u32 RDINDOOR (mega_host_config * megaCfg)
> > +ulong RDINDOOR (mega_host_config * megaCfg)
> >
Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> >1. Merge the most current version (aka: 1.08) of the
> > MegaRAID driver from AMI in to the most
> Standard is right.
> Believe me as someone who are living in Belarus ;-)
OK. I trust you.
>
> Official country name: Belarus
> Language/Nationality: Belarusian
>
> Standard has taken things right as we pronounce them.
>
> Please apply the patc
Rob Landley wrote:
> The same arguments were made 30 years ago about writing the OS in a high
> level language like C rather than in raw assembly. And back in the days of
> the sub-1-mhz CPU, that really meant something.
And then those days we are still writing lot's of ASM in kernels...
> I d
Mike Harrold wrote:
> So what? Crusoe isn't designed for use in supercomputers. It's designed
> for use in laptops where the user is running an email reader, a web
> browser, a word processor, and where the user couldn't give a cr*p about
> performance as long as it isn't noticeable (20% *isn't* f
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > What would be acceptable is something that understands C, and that can be
> > > used to follow these things. Like "tags".
> >
> > I don't like hungarian notation too, but tags is out of question,
> > unfortunate
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > There is some facility allowing to implement this kind of things
> > in the C++ part of the most recent EGCS version which makes implementing
> > such things "relatively" easy - ba
1. This function is only used in the poorly maintained ftape driver.
The usage there isn't appriopriate for modern kernels.
2. This function acts only on the sig set of the current process, so
the first parameter should be just a porinter to current, instead of
currgen->sigset.
So it s
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > Easy - the same way you do for cross compilation. Basically just:
> >
> > export CC=g++ --some-magic-long-option-i-dont-remember; make
>
> ... and you still have only a subset of t
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > 1. This function is only used in the poorly maintained ftape driver.
> >The usage there isn't appriopriate for modern kernels.
>
> The ftape driver isnt exactly poorly maintained. Its just not integrated into
> 2.3/2.4. Ftape 4.0 is still elsewhere
This is wrong, since
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
>
> > We could use some more infrastructure here.
> >
> > (1) A 'make randomconfig' tool that generates a random configuration.
> >
> > (2) Make the architecture a configuration variable (!)
> >
> > (3) A collection
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> >
> > So may I just suggest to repleace the usage of cpp at all with something
> > more
> > suitable for the task at hand and with a much more regular/stringent
> > syntax
> >
David Howells wrote:
>
> I've done an implementation of some of the Win32 "system calls" in a kernel
> module in an attempt to speed up Wine.
Please by no way don't include this patch into the official tree.
It's insane due to the following:
1. Linux is UNIX not NT... (in terms of API)
2. WINE
Simon Richter wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > > I've done an implementation of some of the Win32 "system calls" in a kernel
> > > module in an attempt to speed up Wine.
>
> > 1. Linux is UNIX not NT... (in terms of
Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
> The analogy to typing hex codes or toggling code at the console is
> also apt. Unix ascended over Multix in no small part because of C,
> which drew sneers from the trad programmer of the day. Personally, I
> tend to debug intuitively based on my knowledge of code,
Chris Evans wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Hans Reiser wrote:
>
> > I really think Rik has it right here. In particular, an MP3 player
> > needs to be able to say, I have X milliseconds of buffer so make my
> > worst case latency X milliseconds. The number of requests is the
> > wrong metric,
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> >First of all: In the case of the mp3 player and such there is already a
> >fine
> >proper way to give it better chances on getting it's job done smooth -
> >RT kernel sceduler pri
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
> lessons learned in live customer accounts. In NetWare, requests are
> merged at A) the boundry between the File Cache and the I/O subsystem,
> and B) in the drivers themselves and NOT THE ELEVATOR.
Yes that's the proper place to do this. The generic elevator on a
*sin
Hans Reiser wrote:
>
> I really think Rik has it right here. In particular, an MP3 player needs to be able
>to say, I have
> X milliseconds of buffer so make my worst case latency X milliseconds. The number
>of requests is
> the wrong metric, because the time required per request depends on d
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
>
> Martin,
>
> I'm glad you are not still mad at me. :-) I hope this info was
> helpful.
Yes it was in fact this one of the more interresting posts in this
thread. Thanks for the excellent reading. (However much of it
sounded very familiar... maybe they learned the sam
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> >"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
> >
> >> lessons learned in live customer accounts. In NetWare, requests are
> >> merged at A) the boundry between the File Cache and the I/O sub
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 04:29:18PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > About B) I can' believe you seriously want to duplicate the merging code
> > in each lowlevel driver given most of them could share the same code (as
> > they're doing in linux).
>
> I guess it would just
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>
> Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> By author:John Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > Anyway, one of the things I was hoping to find out by going to
> > linux-kernel was if there was anything other than devfs in the offing:
> > such
Ricky Beam wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Nick Pollitt wrote:
> ...
> >And second, why is the 4K limit there in the first place?
>
> Primarily because it was never designed for 90% of the crap that's in there
> now. I have long hated the BS required to get more than 4k worth of stuff
> out of
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 07:13:31PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > Nice spotting, but bad fix, IMO. swab...() stuff is a perfect example of
> > the dangerous use of macros. BTW, 2.4 has the same problem.
>
> inlines usually generate worse code than macros (the gcc manual l
Ragnar Hojland Espinosa wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 01:45:40AM +0200, Igmar Palsenberg wrote:
> > Some arguments why not to use it in the kernel :
> >
> > - C++ gives overhead. With something like a kernel that's unwanted.
>
> You pay for what you use, no less no more. C++ compilers don'
Marc Lehmann wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 03:07:49PM +0100, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If you don't like this, I suggest you send mail complaining to RedHat.
> > > Customer complaints are going to be the only way that RH is going to be
> > > influenced not to play games like
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > They released a supported ex-Cygnus people approved compiler.
> >
> > Which still makes it an broken, experimental, unreleased and unofficial
> > compiler, with all the consequences I said.
>
> And didnt you write something called pgcc once.
And then there isn't anything
Marc Lehmann wrote:
> If you disagree personally or technically with me you either say this
> in public or private or keep quiet. Attacking me over totally unrelated
> things is obviously some maneuver to distract people from the real,
> kernel-related question, and I have no idea why you are doin
Richard Henderson wrote:
> Frankly, I didn't even consider C++ ABI compatibility with other
> Linux vendors, since I think that's a losing proposition until
> everyone is using gcc3. We were _already_ incompatible, since
> there are a mix of egcs and gcc versions involved.
C++ ABI breaking: SuSE
Igmar Palsenberg wrote:
>
> > I wouldn't mind, either, if this didn't mean that programs compiled
> > on rehdat need redhat versions of the development toolchain / runtime
> > environment to use them :(
Ever tried to recompile SuSE apache from the src.rpm they provide?
I wish you good louck gett
"Albert D. Cahalan" wrote:
>
> Geert Uytterhoeven writes:
>
> > - The colors for the 16 color logo are wrong. We used a hack to
> > give the logo its own color palette, but this no longer works
> > as a side effect of a console color map bug being fixed a while
> > ago. The solutio
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > My work will concern with the internationalization of Linux
> > So, could anybody tell me what kinds of features should be in the
> > consideration when linux be localized from english to Japanese or chinese,
> > say using 2 bytes character set.
>
> Most of the Linux usersp
Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>
> > Bloat removal: being able to run without /proc mounted.
> >
> > We don't have "kernel speed". We have kernel-mode screwing around
> > with text formatting.
>
> Sounds like you might want to maintain an external patch
>
Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> >> If crashes are routine on this machine, I'd recommend that you take
> >> a serious look at your ram. (or if you're overclocking, don't)
> >
> >Crashes were routine, and I was not overclocking, so I took Mike's
> >advice and bought a new 256MB DIMM. The computer hasn'
Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > Uptime of a process is a much better mesaure for a killing
> > candidate then it's size.
>
> You'll have fun with your root shell, then ;)
You mean the remote one?
> The current
Stephen Clouse wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 01:33:50AM +0100, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > AMEN! TO THIS!
> > Uptime of a process is a much better mesaure for a killing candidate
> > then it's size.
&
Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > This is due to the broken calculation formula in oom_kill().
>
> Feel free to write better-working code.
I don't get paid for it and I'm not idling through my days...
-
To unsubscrib
SodaPop wrote:
>
> Rik, is there any way we could get a /proc entry for this, so that one
> could do something like:
I will respond; NO there is no way for security reasons this is not a
good idea.
> cat /proc/oom-kill-scores | sort +3
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscrib
I have a constructive proposal:
It would make much sense to make the oom killer
leave not just root processes alone but processes belonging to a UID
lower
then a certain value as well (500). This would be:
1. Easly managable by the admin. Just let oracle/www and analogous users
have a UID low
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Please point me to an Operating System that runs on any commonly available
> platform and fits your requirements.
> Nick
You don't beleve me if I tell you: DOS extender and JVM (Java Virtual
Machine)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
SodaPop wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > SodaPop wrote:
> > >
> > > Rik, is there any way we could get a /proc entry for this, so that one
> > > could do something like:
> >
> > I will respond; NO there is n
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> [to various people]
>
> No, ulimit does not work. (But it helps a little.)
> No, /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory does not work.
>
> [to Alan]
>
> > Nobody feels its very important because nobody has implemented it.
>
> Yes, that is the right response.
> What can on
Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> I have a constructive proposal:
>
> It would make much sense to make the oom killer
> leave not just root processes alone but processes belonging to a UID
> lower
> then a certain value as well (500). This would be:
>
> 1. Easly managable by
Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> Horst von Brand wrote:
> >
> > "Christian Bodmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >
> > > I can't say I understand the whole MM system, however the random killing
> > > of processes seems like a rather unfortunate solution to the problem. If
> > > someone has a spare minute, m
Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> [snip list of naughty behavior]
>
> > What was that you were saying about "should *never* happen"? Oh, and let's
> Get off your lazy butts and do something about it. Don't work on the
> oom-killer though.. that's only a sy
Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> Also for 2.5, kdev_t needs to go away, along with all those arrays based
> on major number, and be replaced with either "struct char_device" or
> "struct block_device" depending on the device.
>
> I actually went through the kernel in 2.4.0-test days and did this.
> Most k
Benoit Garnier wrote:
>
> Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote :
>
> > But if you start
> > to think you get the conclusion that process killing can't be avoided if
> > you want the system keep running.
>
> What's the point in keeping the OS running if the applications are silently
> killed?
>
> If your
Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> >Right now my best approximation is to make the OOM test be as optimistic as
> >it is safe to be, and the vm_enough_memory() test as pessimistic as
> >sensible. Expect a test patch to appear on this list soon.
>
> ...and here it is!
>
> This fixes a number of small b
Stephen Satchell wrote:
>
> At 12:41 AM 3/25/01 +0100, you wrote:
> >If your box is running for example a mail server, and it appears that
> >another process is juste eating the free memory, do you really want to kill
> >the mail server, just because it's the main process and consuming more
> >me
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > We need a size, and I am strongly in favor of sizeof(dev_t) = 8;
> > this is already true in glibc.
>
> The fact that glibc is a quivering mass of bloat, and total and utter crap
> makes you suggest that the Linux ker
Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > Ah... and of course I think this patch can already go directly
> > into the official kernel. The quality of code should permit
> > it. I would esp. request Rik van Riel to have a closer l
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > That depends what you mean by "must not". If it's your missile guidance
> > system, aircraft autopilot or life support system, the system must not run
> > out of memory in the first place. If the system breaks down badly, killing
> > init and thus panicking (hence rebooting,
Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> >- the AGE_FACTOR calculation will overflow after the system has
> > an uptime of just _3_ days
>
> Tsk tsk tsk...
>
> >Now if you can make something which preserves the heuristics which
> >serve us so well on desktop boxes and add something that makes it
> >also wor
"Eric W. Biederman" wrote:
>
> Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:47:13AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > What do you mean by problems 5 years down the road? The real issue is that
> > > this 32-bit block count limit affects composite devices like MD
Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> >Out of Memory: Killed process 117 (sendmail).
> >
> >What we did to run it out of memory, I don't know. But I do know that
> >it shouldn't be killing one process more than once... (the process
> >should not exist after one try...)
>
> This is a known bug in the Out-of
Michel Wilson wrote:
>
> > relative ages. The major flaw in my code is that a sufficiently
> > long-lived
> > process becomes virtually immortal, even if it happens to spring a serious
> > leak after this time - the flaw in yours is that system processes
>
> I think this could easily be fixed i
Jonathan Morton wrote:
>
> Oh and BTW, I think Bit/sqr(seconds) is a perfectly acceptable unit for
> "badness". Think about it - it increases with pigginess and decreases with
> longevity. I really don't see a problem with it per se.
Right it's not a problem pre se, but as you already explain
Ingo Oeser wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 03:24:16PM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > > @@ -93,6 +95,10 @@
> > > p->uid == 0 || p->euid == 0)
> > > points /= 4;
> > >
> > >
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>
> This is my opinion on the issue. Short summary: "I'm sick of the
> administrative burden associated with keeping dev_t dense."
>
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > And let's take a look at /dev. Do a "ls -l /dev" and think about it. Every
> > device needs a unique numbe
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > > Another example: all the stupid pseudo-SCSI drivers that got their own
> > > major numbers, and wanted their very own names in /dev. They are BAD for
> > > the user. Install-scripts etc used to be able to just test /dev/hd[a-d]
> > > and /dev/
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > high-end-disks. Rather the reverse. I'm advocating the SCSI layer not
> > hogging a major number, but letting low-level drivers get at _their_
> > requests directly.
>
> A major for 'disk' generically makes total sense. Classing raid controllers
> as 'scsi' isnt neccessaril
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> >
> > Am I hearing you state you want dynamic device points and dynamic majors?
>
> Yes and no.
>
> We need static structures for user space - from a user perspective it
> makes a ton more sense to say "I want to see all disk
> what do other vaguely unix-like systems do? does, say, plan9 have a
> better way of dealing with all this?
Yes.
Normal UNIX has as well. For reffernece see: block ver raw
devices on docs.sun.com :-).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a m
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Exactly. It's just that for historical reasons, I think the major for
> > "disk" should be either the old IDE or SCSI one, which just can show more
> > devices. That way old installers etc work without having to suddenly start
> > knowing about /dev/disk0.
>
> They will mos
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Why do you worry about installers? New distro - new kernel - new
> > installer
>
> Because the same code tends to be shared with post install configuration
> tools too.
So change them as well for a new distribution. What's there problem.
There isn't anything out there you
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> OK - everybody back from San Jose - pity I couldnt come -
> and it is no longer April 1st, so we can continue quarreling
> a little.
>
> Interesting that where I had divided stuff in the trivial part,
> the interesting part and the lot-of-work part we already start
>
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > So change them as well for a new distribution. What's there problem.
> > There isn't anything out there you can't do by hand.
> > Fortunately so!
>
> So users cannot go back and forward between new and old kernels. Very good.
> Try explaining that to serious production -use
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > If anything I'm a *SERIOUS* production user. And I wouldn't allow
> > *ANYBODY* here to run am explicitly tagged as developement kernel
> > here anyway in an production enviornment. That's what releases are for
> > damn.
> > Or do you think that Linux should still preserve D
> One thing I certainly miss: DevFS is not mandatory (yet).
That's "only" due to the fact that DevFS is an insanely racy and
instable
piece of CRAP. I'm unhappy it's there anyway...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTEC
Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [BERECZ Szabolcs]
> > Here is a new syscall. With this you can change the owner of a running
> > procces.
>
> > + if (current->euid)
> > + return -EPERM;
>
> Use capable().
>
> > + p = find_task_by_pid(pid);
> > + p->fsuid = p->euid =
Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> >
> > Jonathan Morton writes:
> > > >- page_count(page) == (1 + !!page->buffers));
> > >
> > > Two inversions in a row?
> >
> > It is the most straightforward way to make a '1' or '0'
> > integer from the NUL
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> (btw, also the current rawio uses a 512byte bh->b_size granularity that is even
> worse than the 1024byte b_size of the blkdev, O_DIRECT is much smarter
> on this side as it uses the softblocksize of the fs that can be as well
> 4k if you created the fs with -b 4096)
Am
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:13:33AM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > > (buffered and direct) to work with a 4096 bytes granularity instead of
> >
> > You mean PAGE_SIZE :-).
>
> In my first patch it is really 4096 bytes, but yes I
> - Political fixes:
> o There were still some penguins left carrying a glass of beer or wine.
> This problem is about 2 years old!
Could You please for the sake of political correctness just replace
the beer with a glass of vodka please... It tastes better anyway!
-
To unsubscrib
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 May 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > Except that Linus wont hand out major numbers, which means I can't even boot
> > simply off such a device. I bet the vendors in question dont think the sun
> > shines out of linus backside any more.
>
> Actually, it does. It'
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> and then use
>
> fd = open("/dev/fd0/colourspace", O_RDWR);
> This, btw, is Al Viro's wet dream. But I have to agree: using name spaces
> etc is MUCH preferable to ioctl's, makes code more readable and logical,
> and often makes it possible to do things you could
Andrzej Krzysztofowicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
> The following patch cleans up a bit usage of parameters related to
> number of minors per disk in the SCSI subsystem. This is a preliminary
> patch and it seems to not contain any problematic changes. The full version
> of the patch (that allows to succes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > They are entirely different. Too different sets of operations.
>
> Maybe you didnt understand what I meant.
> both bdev and cdev take care of the correspondence
> device number <---> struct with operations.
>
> The operations are different, but all bdev/cdev code
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Martin Dalecki writes:
>
> > I fully agree with you.
>
> Good.
>
> Unfortunately I do not fully agree with you.
>
> > Most of the places where there kernel is passing kdev_t
> > would be entierly satisfied with only the k
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Martin Dalecki writes:
>
> > Erm... I wasn't talking about the DESIRED state of affairs!
> > I was talking about the CURRENT state of affairs. OK?
>
> Oh, but in 1995 it was quite possible to compile the kernel
> with kdev_t
And if we are at the topic... Those are the places where blk_size[]
get's
abused, since it's in fact a property of a FS in fact and not the
property of
a particular device... blksect_size is the array describing the physical
access limits of a device and blk_size get's usually checked against it.
w/drivers/char/raw.c Mon Apr 30 22:57:20 2001
@@ -124,22 +124,25 @@
return err;
}
-
- /*
-* Don't interfere with mounted devices: we cannot safely set
- * the blocksize on a device which is already mounted.
+ /*
+* 29.04.2001 Martin Dalecki:
+
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 May 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > IMHO it would be nice to (for 2.4) create wrappers for accessing the
> > block arrays, so that we can more easily dispose of the arrays when 2.5
> > rolls around...
>
> No.
>
> We do not create wrappers "so that we can ea
Joel Becker wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 05:24:37PM -0700, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
> > FWIW (perhaps not much in this context), the POSIX way is sysconf(_SC_CLK_TCK)
> >
> > POSIX sysconf is pretty useful for this kind of thing (not just HZ, either).
>
> Well, how many hundred thin
Hello!
The attached patch remove the get_hardblock_size() function entierly
from the kernel. This is due to the fact that this function is
compleatly
unneccessary due to the existance of get_hardsect_size(), which got
introduced to properly encapsulate acesses to the hardsec_size[].
As a side eff
Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 21 2001, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > building a kernel with 2.4.3-ac11 and lvm beta7 + vfs_locking_patch-2.4.2 yields:
> >
> > oscar# depmod -ae 2.4.3-ac11
> > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
>/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac11/kernel/drivers/md/lvm-mod.o
> > dep
Jeff Chua wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > > > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
>/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac11/kernel/drivers/md/lvm-mod.o
>
> try this (after you have applied the patch for lvm 0.9.1_beta7) ...
>
> Jeff
> [[E
"Dupuis, Don" wrote:
>
> I have already sent a patch to Alan and Linus on this issue. Linus has
> never responed and Alan said he would look into it in the middle of April.
> Nothing is new at this point
>
> -Original Message-
> From: PhiloVivero [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunda
Tim Jansen wrote:
>
> The Linux Device Registry (devreg) is a kernel patch that adds a device
> database in XML format to the /proc filesystem. It collects all information
OH SHIT!! ^^^
Why don't you just add postscript output to /proc?
> about the system's physical devices, creates pers
Tim Jansen wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 24 April 2001 11:40, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > Tim Jansen wrote:
> > > The Linux Device Registry (devreg) is a kernel patch that adds a device
> > > database in XML format to the /proc filesystem. It collects all
> > OH SHIT!!
The attached patch is fixing georgeous "backward compatibility"
in the mount system command. It is removing two useless defines in
the kernel headers and finally doubles the number of possible
flags for the mount command.
Please apply.
If there are any line count difference warnings when applyin
Hello!
The following patch is making the get_empty_super() function
just local to the place where it's only use is and where it's only
use should be: fs/super.c
The removal of this symbol from ksyms.c should:
1. Help making the module interface cleaner by a tinny margin :-).
2. shouldn't hurt
Ingo Oeser wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 10:58:46AM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > 1. Help making the module interface cleaner by a tinny margin :-).
>
> You only help changing the API during a stable[1] series. Wait until 2.5
> for this.
>
> API cannot change
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> From: Martin Dalecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> The attached patch is fixing georgeous "backward compatibility"
> in the mount system command. It is removing two useless defines in
> the kernel headers and fina
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Dump was a stupid program in the first place. Leave it behind.
Not quite Linus - dump/restore are nice tools to create for example
automatic over network installation servers, i.e. efficient system
images
or such. tar/cpio and friends don't deal properly with
a. holes in
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> > Fine with me. Actually in _all_ cases execept cdrom.c it's preceded by
> > either sync_dev() or fsync_dev(). What do you think about pulling that
> > into the same function? Actually, that's what I've done in namespace
>
Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > I think in the context you are inventig the proposed function,
> > the drivers has allways an inode at hand. And contrary to what Linus
>
> Read the patch. Almost all cases are of the &
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
