From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
Most code already uses consts for the struct kernel_param_ops,
sweep the kernel for the last offending stragglers. Other than
include/linux/moduleparam.h and kernel/params.c all other changes
were generated with the following Coccinelle SmPL patch. Merge
conflicts betwee
Andrew, i'm really very very sorry for those mistakes, here is the latest, it
adds documentation for every new function, please use it to replace the patch
in -mm tree you added just now:
add-new-string-functions-strict_strto-and-convert-kernel-params-to-use-them.patch
Thank you, Andre
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:11:43 +0800 Yi Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- a/include/linux/kernel.h 2008-01-31 00:41:46.0 +0800
> --- b/include/linux/kernel.h 2008-02-01 04:30:49.0 +0800
This isn't a patch. I wonder how that happened?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:11:43 +0800 Yi Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- a/include/linux/kernel.h 2008-01-31 00:41:46.0 +0800
> --- b/include/linux/kernel.h 2008-02-01 04:30:49.0 +0800
> @@ -141,6 +141,10 @@ extern unsigned long simple_strtoul(cons
> extern long simple_strtol
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:11:43 +0800 Yi Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch is a resend, it changes previous name "real_" to "strict_"
> according to Randy Dunlap's feedback. Please consider to apply. thanks.
>
> Currently, for every sysfs node, the callers will be responsible for
> imple
This patch is a resend, it changes previous name "real_" to "strict_"
according to Randy Dunlap's feedback. Please consider to apply. thanks.
Currently, for every sysfs node, the callers will be responsible for
implementing store operation, so many many callers are doing duplicate
things to valid
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 00:30:17 +0800 Yi Yang wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 09:03 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:18:22 +0800 Yi Yang wrote:
> >
> > > Currently, for every sysfs node, the callers will be responsible for
> > > implementing store operation, so many many callers
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 09:03 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:18:22 +0800 Yi Yang wrote:
>
> > Currently, for every sysfs node, the callers will be responsible for
> > implementing store operation, so many many callers are doing duplicate
> > things to validate input, they have t
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:18:22 +0800 Yi Yang wrote:
> Currently, for every sysfs node, the callers will be responsible for
> implementing store operation, so many many callers are doing duplicate
> things to validate input, they have the same mistakes because they are
> calling simple_strtol/ul/ll/u
Currently, for every sysfs node, the callers will be responsible for
implementing store operation, so many many callers are doing duplicate
things to validate input, they have the same mistakes because they are
calling simple_strtol/ul/ll/ull, especially for module params, they are
just numeric, bu
Hi,
On 7/21/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Saturday 21 July 2007 20:11, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> I confirm that the bug is fixed.
Some string functions were optimized away. When I discovered it
I was astonished the kernel booted at all. Anyways, it could explain
a number of wei
Andrew Morton pisze:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 20:11:16 +0200 "Michal Piotrowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Yet another one:
>> http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/4.jpg
>> it looks very weird ;)
>>
>> Why "Linux 2/6/22-git14 #14 SMP..." ba
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 20:11:16 +0200 "Michal Piotrowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Yet another one:
> http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/4.jpg
> it looks very weird ;)
>
> Why "Linux 2/6/22-git14 #14 SMP..." banner is displayed 5 times?
Was
On Saturday 21 July 2007 20:11, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> I confirm that the bug is fixed.
Some string functions were optimized away. When I discovered it
I was astonished the kernel booted at all. Anyways, it could explain
a number of weird effects.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On 21/07/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Saturday 21 July 2007 18:00:52 Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi Andi,
>
> On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Satyam Sharma pisze:
> > > > [...]
> > > > Gargh! M
On 21/07/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 21/07/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 21 July 2007 18:00:52 Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> > Hi Andi,
> >
> > On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On 21/07/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Saturday 21 July 2007 18:00:52 Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi Andi,
>
> On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Satyam Sharma pisze:
> > > > [...]
> > > > Gargh! M
On Saturday 21 July 2007 18:00:52 Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi Andi,
>
> On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Satyam Sharma pisze:
> > > > [...]
> > > > Gargh! My system obviously cannot boot without libata. Guess
Hi Andi,
On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Satyam Sharma pisze:
> > [...]
> > Gargh! My system obviously cannot boot without libata. Guess it's
> > time to go through git log and see how to fix that build breakage
> >
On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Satyam Sharma pisze:
> > [...]
> > Gargh! My system obviously cannot boot without libata. Guess it's
> > time to go through git log and see how to fix that build breakage
> > myself ..
On 7/21/07, Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Satyam Sharma pisze:
> [...]
> Gargh! My system obviously cannot boot without libata. Guess it's
> time to go through git log and see how to fix that build breakage
> myself ...
>
> Michal, how did you even manage to build / boot this kerne
On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, this worked:
> His .config has CONFIG_PROFILE_LIKELY=y
> which replaces unlikely() / likely() with do_check_likely() and forces
> gcc to clobber %eax with the condition itself, which in our case was
> (ret < 0) == TRUE, and thus, the "1"
Satyam Sharma pisze:
> On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hopefully this bug should be 100% reproducible at boot time anyway.
>> Don't care much for XFS and unionfs, but hoping deselecting ATA from
>> the config doesn't change the variables much in this equation. ]
>
>
> Garg
On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
%eax == ffea == -22 == -EINVAL.
But:
When I replace the BUG_ON() with Greg's (or my modified) patch,
the kernel ignores that error as we wanted, but _still_ crashes before
finding the root block device (because ATA is not in kernel
Ok, this worked:
His .config has CONFIG_PROFILE_LIKELY=y
which replaces unlikely() / likely() with do_check_likely() and forces
gcc to clobber %eax with the condition itself, which in our case was
(ret < 0) == TRUE, and thus, the "1" value we saw in %eax in the
register dumps.
The usage of unl
On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hopefully this bug should be 100% reproducible at boot time anyway.
Don't care much for XFS and unionfs, but hoping deselecting ATA from
the config doesn't change the variables much in this equation. ]
Gargh! My system obviously cannot boot
[ Considering this has sufficiently excited me, I became the second person
to illegitimately download 2.6.22-mm1 and am presently building Michal's
config. The strange thing is that I couldn't get 22-mm1 to even build with
the posted .config -- so had to deselect XFS, ATA, unionfs.
Hopefully this
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 06:37:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:02:57 -0700 Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- a/kernel/params.c
> > +++ b/kernel/params.c
> > @@ -567,7 +567,11 @@ static void __init kernel_param_sysfs_se
> > kobject_set_name(&mk->kobj, name);
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:02:57 -0700 Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- a/kernel/params.c
> +++ b/kernel/params.c
> @@ -567,7 +567,11 @@ static void __init kernel_param_sysfs_se
> kobject_set_name(&mk->kobj, name);
> kobject_init(&mk->kobj);
> ret = kobject_add(&mk->kobj);
>
On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 02:28:52AM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Oh, which means ...
> >
> >
> > On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/21/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 0
On 21/07/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oh, which means ...
On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/21/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 03:59:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:50:47 -0700
> > > Greg
Oh, which means ...
On 7/21/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/21/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 03:59:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:50:47 -0700
> > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 a
On 7/21/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 03:59:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:50:47 -0700
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 06:32:21PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,
> > >
> > > This looks
> > > So it's not a sysfs bug, but rather a driver issue that this is
> > > catching.
> >
> > In that case a BUG was way too harsh treatment, and in fact directly
> > contributed to our inability to debug the bug!
> >
> > Can we wind that back a
>
> Can we wind that back a bit? Add some useful printks and then recover
> in some fashion?
Sure, I don't mind doing that at all.
Hm, it looks like Randy added this back in September last year with:
commit d8c7649e99e4b081b624aefe1e77caa30b53cb18
Author: Randy D
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:50:47 -0700
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 06:32:21PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > This looks like a sysfs bug
> >
> > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/3.jpg
>
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 06:32:21PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> This looks like a sysfs bug
>
> http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/3.jpg
>
> l *kernel_param_sysfs_setup+0x75
> 0xc13c0894 is in kernel_param_sysfs_setup (
Hi Greg,
This looks like a sysfs bug
http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/broken-out-2007-07-20-00-22/3.jpg
l *kernel_param_sysfs_setup+0x75
0xc13c0894 is in kernel_param_sysfs_setup (kernel/params.c:570).
565 mk->mod = THIS_MODULE;
566 kobj_set_ks
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 01:54:04PM +0100, Butter, Frank wrote:
> Is there any possibility to set the values for IPC-ressources
> (SHM/SEM) other than by changing the headerfiles?
Sure, that's what sysctl is for. See sysctl(8) or /proc/sys/kernel/ .
Erik
--
J.A.K. (Erik) Mouw, Information and
Is there any possibility to set the values for IPC-ressources
(SHM/SEM) other than by changing the headerfiles?
A software we want to install wants us to have set the following
values:
SHM MAX 33554432
SHM MIN 1
MNI 128
SEG 128
SEM MNI 128
SEM MNS 4096
SEM MNU 4096
SEM ONE 32
MSL 32
40 matches
Mail list logo
