[ please don't edit folk off the cc list unless you *know* they
are getting duplicates ... ]
It's got as much documentation in the kernel tree as that
old /proc/acpi/alarm thing. More, in fact, since the GIT
comment for the putback creating /sys/rtc/.../wakealarm
files has lots of info
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:31:32PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
for i in /sys/block/sd*/queue/scheduler ; do echo -n scheduler for $i was:
; cat $i ; echo anticipatory $i ; done
Should show you the scheduler for all libata/scsi discs, and switch to
anticipatory. It probably
On 6/22/07, Paul Menage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/21/07, Pavel Emelianov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nothing wrong, but currently they are shown in natural points, i.e. in
those that the controller accounts them in. For RSS controller the natural
point is page, but auto-converting them from
On Jun 19, 2007, at 11:08:24, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 02:35:22AM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
c. open() flag to unlink a file before returning the fd
You probably want a tmpfile(3) -like affair which never has a
pathname to begin with. It could be useful for
For what it's worth... I tried applying
--- a/drivers/ata/ahci.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/ahci.c
@@ -516,6 +516,8 @@ static void ahci_save_initial_config(struct pci_dev *pdev,
* reset. Values without are used for driver operation.
*/
hpriv-saved_cap = cap = readl(mmio +
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:25:48 -0700 Ravikiran G Thirumalai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Paper over 'select' inadequacies.
Signed-off-by: Ravikiran Thirumalai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc5/arch/x86_64/Kconfig
===
Alan Cox writes:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:39:45 +0800
David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 01:52 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Users should use the libata based drivers for SATA drives.
NAK. Not all IDE drivers are converted yet. Not even all the relatively
Dave Hansen writes:
Several of our on-disk filesystems have an ioctl function that already
has indented goto labels. I don't think it's quite worth churning all
of these (working) filesystems to make a style checker happy.
I agree.
I think it's worse style to be mixing label indentation in
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:03:44 +0200 Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20/06/07, Roland Dreier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Commit 4a0df2ef added the following to scripts/checkpatch.pl:
print Use of volatile is usually wrong: see
Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt\n;
Paul Mackerras wrote:
Alan Cox writes:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:39:45 +0800
David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 01:52 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Users should use the libata based drivers for SATA drives.
NAK. Not all IDE drivers are converted yet. Not even all the
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:55:30 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:25:48 -0700 Ravikiran G Thirumalai [EMAIL
PROTECTED] wrote:
Paper over 'select' inadequacies.
Signed-off-by: Ravikiran Thirumalai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc5/arch/x86_64/Kconfig
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 03:11:45PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
On Friday 22 June 2007 13:02:26 Linus Torvalds wrote:
In fact, I suspect pretty much any documentation (whether technical or
about processes and/or style) makes sense to have translated if the energy
and ability to do that exists. I
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 00:00:14 -0400
Steven Rostedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's a very nice paper by Matthew Willcox that describes Softirqs,
Tasklets, Bottom Halves, Task Queues, Work Queues and Timers[1].
In the paper it describes the history of these items. Softirqs and
tasklets were
From: Denis Cheng [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the explicit memset call could be optimized out by data initialization,
thus all the fill working can be done by the compiler implicitly.
and C standard guaranteed all the unspecified data field initialized to zero.
Signed-off-by: Denis Cheng [EMAIL
Carlo Wood wrote:
Just one kernel version? The problem here is in every
kernel revision after 551c012d7eea3dc5ec063c7ff9c718d39e77634f
2.6.20-rc2,rc3,rc4,rc5,rc6,rc7 ... 2.6.20 ... 2.6.21 ... 2.6.22-rc5
noop:
Timing buffered disk reads: 254 MB in 3.00 seconds = 84.66 MB/sec
On Jun 22, 2007, Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> has probably made it made it much more *unlikely* that the Linux
> kernel will ever go GPLv3.
That was a given from the start. The spin that there was any chance
whatsoever it could possibly happen was just that. Even if Linus
could
Hi.
I have recently begun to try and use suspend to ram more, and have an
intermittent problem. Actually, it's a couple of (possibly related) problems,
but I'll start with the one that's easiest.
Sometimes, when I resume, the keyboard stops responding. I then need to hold
down the power
Hi,
2007/6/22, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Thursday 21 June 2007 23:23:54 dave young wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2007/6/22, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Thursday 21 June 2007 10:40:17 Li Yang wrote:
> > > This is a Chinese translated version of Documentation/HOWTO. Currently
> > >
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Landley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 1:33 PM
> To: dave young
> Cc: Li Yang-r58472; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; TripleX Chung; Maggie
Chen;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 08:53:47PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
Hi Sergei,
Thanks for taking the time to look over my patch.
>I guess it's been based on the prior work by John Stultz (and me too :-)?
At some level I guess so. John did send me a patch a while ago.
>If you
On Saturday 16 June 2007 22:40:53 Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
> Hello All , Does anoyone know howto identify a cause for these(*) ?
> Or of any tools to help in the identification of the cause ?
> So far the Machine checks only happen when I am running bonnie++ against
>
On Jun 22, 2007, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 01:26:54AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> No, this thread was about additional permissions to combine with other
>> licenses. I didn't suggest anything about relicensing whatsoever,
>> that's all noise out of not
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 07:57:19AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
Hi Daniel.
> As I said in our private thread, I do think you should be using
> update_vsyscall() .. update_vsyscall() is just called when the time is
> set, usually that happens in the timer interrupt and sometimes that
> happens in
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 02:06:01PM -0700, john stultz wrote:
Hi John.
> Hey Tony,
> Thanks for sending this out! I really appreciate this work, as its been
> on my todo forever, and I've just not been able to focus on it.
> Currently it seems a bit minimal of a conversion (ideally there
from: Marc Pignat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
kunmap must be called on the pointer returned by kmap.
Signed-off-by: Marc Pignat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
N.B: This is the same patch as yesterday, with proper Signed-off-by and more
comments.
The buffer variable is used this way:
buffer
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> plain text document attachment (tasklet-driver-hacks.patch)
> Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API, which does not rely
> on the tasklet implementation details.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/macintosh/Kconfig b/drivers/macintosh/Kconfig
> index 0852d33..dbe9626 100644
> --- a/drivers/macintosh/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/macintosh/Kconfig
> @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
> menuconfig MACINTOSH_DRIVERS
> bool "Macintosh device drivers"
> depends on PPC || MAC || X86
>
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 10:31 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ram Pai wrote:
> >
> > Peter, I am not working on it currently. But i am interested in getting
> > it done. I have the seed set of patches which had Al Viro's ideas
> > incorporated. Infact those patches were sent on lkml 2 months back.
>
While working on unshare support for the network namespace I noticed
we were putting clone flags in an int. Which is weird because the
syscall uses unsigned long and we at least need an unsigned to
properly hold all of the unshare flags.
So to make the code consistent, this patch updates the
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:36 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > plain text document attachment (tasklet-driver-hacks.patch)
> > Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API, which does not rely
> > on the tasklet implementation details.
>
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 11:15:25PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > btw., back then we also tried a spin_is_locked() based inner loop
> > > but it didnt help the ->tree_lock lockups either. In
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 05:26:33AM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >
> > > > The oops seems to occur after a page unmapping using dma_unmap_page()
> > > > followed
> > > > by a flush_dcache_page() (in
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:00:14AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> The most part, tasklets today are not used for time critical functions.
> Running tasklets in thread context is not harmful to performance of
> the overall system. But running them in interrupt context is, since
> they increase the
Ram Pai wrote:
>
> the second patch made a /proc/propagation interface which had almost the
> same fields, but also added fields to show the propagation type of the
> mount as well as pointers to its peers and master depending on the type
> of the mount.
>
> I think the consensus seems to have
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> plain text document attachment (tasklets-to-workqueues.patch)
> This patch creates an alternative for drivers from using tasklets.
> It creates a "work_tasklet". When configured to use work_tasklets
> instead of tasklets, instead of
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:00:15AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I believe this was originally done by Dipankar Sarma. I pulled these
> changes from the -rt kernel.
>
> For better preformance, RCU should use a softirq instead of a
> tasklet.
I was under the imporession we had merged this a
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 08:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:36 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > plain text document attachment (tasklet-driver-hacks.patch)
> > > Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:00:16AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Tasklets are really a separate entity from softirqs, so they
> deserve their own file. Also this allows us to easily replace
> tasklets for something else ;-)
It's a bit pointless when softirq.h still always includes it. A while
Hi Stephane,
On 2007.06.21 01:36:45 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Bjorn,
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 02:59:33PM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > Bjorn,
> >
> > I ran into one issue related with the new allocator.
Should be the same with 2.6.21 and earlier, the "new" allocator should
do
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 13:31 +0200, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> OK, I fixed the spacing in both occurences.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> --- arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c.orig 2007-06-19 08:40:05.0 -0400
> +++ arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c2007-06-21
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> While working on unshare support for the network namespace I noticed
> we were putting clone flags in an int. Which is weird because the
> syscall uses unsigned long and we at least need an unsigned to
> properly hold all of the unshare flags.
>
> So to make the code
On 14/06/07, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i'm pleased to announce release -v17 of the CFS scheduler patchset.
The rolled-up CFS patch against v2.6.22-rc4, v2.6.22-rc4-mm2, v2.6.21.5
or v2.6.20.13 can be downloaded from the usual place:
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:06 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ram Pai wrote:
> >
> > the second patch made a /proc/propagation interface which had almost the
> > same fields, but also added fields to show the propagation type of the
> > mount as well as pointers to its peers and master depending on
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:06:40PM -0400, James Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Chris Mason wrote:
>
> > > The incomplete mediation flows from the design, since the pathname-based
> > > mediation doesn't generalize to cover all objects unlike label- or
> > > attribute-based mediation. And
At Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:05:45 -0700 (PDT),
David Miller wrote:
>
> From: Yoshinori Sato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:59:16 +0900
>
> > At Tue, 12 Jun 2007 01:08:55 -0700 (PDT),
> > David Miller wrote:
> >
> > > 2) It is much better to add the appropriate CONFIG_SYSCTL
> > >
* Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:00:15AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I believe this was originally done by Dipankar Sarma. I pulled these
> > changes from the -rt kernel.
> >
> > For better preformance, RCU should use a softirq instead of a
> >
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:53:13 +0200
>> Cedric Le Goater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> +static int __init nsproxy_cache_init(void)
>>> +{
>>> + nsproxy_cachep = kmem_cache_create("nsproxy", sizeof(struct nsproxy),
>>> +
Paul Menage wrote:
> On 6/20/07, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Display the current usage and limit in a more user friendly manner.
>> Number
>> of pages can be confusing if the page size is different. Some systems
>> can choose a page size of 64KB.
>
> I'm not sure that's such
* Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we probably want some numbers, at least for tasklets used in
> potentially performance critical code.
which actual in-kernel tasklets do you have in mind? I'm not aware of
any in performance critical code. (now that both the RCU and the
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 09:51:35AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think we probably want some numbers, at least for tasklets used in
> > potentially performance critical code.
>
> which actual in-kernel tasklets do you have in mind? I'm not
Ram Pai wrote:
>
> Ok. so you think /proc/mounts can be extended easily without breaking
> any userspace commands?
>
> well lets see..
> 1. to disambiguate bind mounts, we have to add a field that displays the
>path to the mount's root dentry from the filesystem's root
>dentry.
Mark,
please fix your mail client to do proper line wraps at column 78.
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 15:39 -0400, Beauchemin, Mark wrote:
> Hi,
> I've found a preemption problem in kernel/rtmutex.c:649. The BUG_ON
> listed in the patch below makes sure a preemption event hasn't
> occurred since
Balbir Singh wrote:
[snip]
>> With the current dual list approach, something like that could be done
>> by treating the container lists as pure FIFO (and ignore the reference
>> bit and all that) and make container reclaim only unmap, not write out
>> pages.
>>
>> Then global reclaim will do the
Current -rt is broken when compiling with CONFIG_PARAVIRT and
CONFIG_MCOUNT both enabled. Because CONFIG_MCOUNT disables
CONFIG_REGPARM, the calling convention must once again be explicit
with fastcall. However, this was only half-way addressed in the -rt
patch (adding fastcall back to
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 04:59:54PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 21:54 +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> > On 2007-06-21T15:42:28, James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
>
> > And now, yes, I know AA doesn't mediate IPC or networking (yet), but
> > that's a missing
Because the page which SLOB allocator got does not have PG_slab,
I put back the result that kobjsize made a mistake in.
allocateしたページにPG_slabを付ける必要があるのでは無いでしょうか。
I need to add PG_slab to the allocate page, and will not there be it?
Signed-off-by: Yoshinori Sato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git
Neil Brown wrote:
On Thursday June 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't get a comment on my suggestion for a quick and dirty fix for
-assume-clean issues...
Bill Davidsen wrote:
How about a simple solution which would get an array on line and still
be safe? All it would take is a flag which
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the freezes that Miklos was seeing were hardirq contexts blocking in
> task_rq_lock() - that is done with interrupts disabled. (Miklos i
> think also tried !NOHZ kernels and older kernels, with a similar
> result.)
>
> plus on the ptrace side, the
Update to checkpatch.pl v0.06. Of note:
- do { and else handled correctly as control structures for { matching
- trailing whitespace correctly tripped when line otherwise empty
- support for const, including const foo * const bar
- multiline macros defining values correctly reported
This
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 08:50:54AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> > PDF version
> > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/handbook/handbook-en-0.3-rc1.pdf
>
> No HTML version?
I see I'm not the last of a kind... Or? So:
No txt version?
> > Any comments, suggestions and patches are welcome.
Robert Hancock wrote:
Peter Rabbitson wrote:
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
What does /proc/mtrr look like in the two cases?
Identical for mem=3900 and without it.
reg00: base=0x ( 0MB), size=2048MB: write-back, count=1
reg01: base=0x8000 (2048MB), size=1024MB: write-back, count=1
* Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Current -rt is broken when compiling with CONFIG_PARAVIRT and
> CONFIG_MCOUNT both enabled. Because CONFIG_MCOUNT disables
> CONFIG_REGPARM, the calling convention must once again be explicit
> with fastcall. However, this was only half-way
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:57 +0200, Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
[...]
> Well, I'm using SuSE Pro 9.3 (excellent choice by the way),
Perhaps in April 2005. And if I read
http://www.pro-linux.de/security/7043 correctly it is unsupported
anyways (sorry, I can't find a date on that page).
ATM there are
On 06/22, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> Yeah well... I wanted to have the least surprise path... that is,
> without my patch, signalfd will "sometimes" steal the SIGSEGV depending
> on who races to the lock first, thus causing the target thread to
> re-execute the faulting instruction and
On Jun 21 2007 16:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> For my part, I think the 2.6. did not go as well as the 2.6.,
>> beginning with x=16.
>
> you misunderstood the even/odd it was never 2.x.y with y odd/even being stable
> / development, it was the x being even/odd to indicate stable /
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:52:11 +0200
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Users should use the libata based drivers for SATA drives.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> --- linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm2/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt.old
> 2007-06-21
> It's this simple, those who chose the GPLv2 for Linux and their
> contributions to it don't want people to create derivative works of their
> works that can't be Tivoized. They see this as a feature, and it's the
Untrue. Many of us think (and the lawyers are unsure) that it is covered
by GPLv2
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:39:45 +0800
David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 01:52 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Users should use the libata based drivers for SATA drives.
>
> NAK. Not all IDE drivers are converted yet. Not even all the relatively
> common ones.
All the
Nicolas Ferre :
Marc Pignat :
please use this patch, sorry for the later
My eyes are too tired or this patch is the same as the previous one :-\
Indeed, my eyes where too tired ;-) Sorry for the trouble.
--
Nicolas Ferre
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> The question is, do the kernel developers want to encourage people who don't
> speak English to mess with the kernel, any more than they want to encourage
> kernel developers who don't know C? Is kernel documentation in Chinese a
The majority of the world population do not speak English.
Hi ,
Nay body has idea about OOB layout of YAFFS2?
Thanks
Nobin Mathew
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 11:49:37PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, 21 June 2007 21:39, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > > > I'll see if I can reproduce your problem here.
> > >
> > > Yes, I can. It's only necessary to load usb-storage
> Another law of negotiations --- don't goad people into hardening their
> positions; it helps neither you nor your interests.
That always depends which side you really support, whether you want to
force someone to wedge themselves in an undefendable corner and so on..
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from
2007/6/19, Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:10:00AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 13:08:49 +0200
> Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 16-06-2007 23:35, Marcin .lusarz wrote:
> > > hi
> > > after upgrading kernel from 2.6.20
I don't see any reason why this is a semaphore, convert.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/sysfs/file.c | 13 +++--
fs/sysfs/inode.c |4 ++--
fs/sysfs/sysfs.h |2 +-
3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
--- wireless-dev.orig/fs/sysfs/file.c
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:49 +0200, Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
> While some of you dislike
> closed source drivers, the choices "we users" face are:
> - closed source drivers with closed source OS
> - closed source drivers with open source OS
> Please consider that we are living in a REAL world, and not
On Thu, 21 June 2007 13:57:15 -0400, James Bruce wrote:
>
> efficient atomic snapshots on a filesystem. There are still some issues
> with unexpected disk space usage (it requires _additional_ disk space to
> _delete_ a file), and it tends to use more memory (you want to delay
> client writes
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Marco Berizzi wrote:
>
> > > > Some RCU callback (that calls kmem_cache_free()) oopsed and
> > > > panic'ed his box. [ Marco had experienced fs issues lately, so
we
> > > could
> > > > suspect file_free_rcu() here, but I can't really tell from the
I just updated my linux tree from 2.6.20-rc6 to 2.6.22-rc3 for my
custom PXA270 based board and I discovered that now sleep/wakeup
functionality doesn't work anymore! :'(
After several merges, compiling stages and tests I discovered that the
problem arises from 2.6.21 to 2.6.22-rc1 and that the
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 11:19 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:49 +0200, Zoltán HUBERT wrote:
> > While some of you dislike
> > closed source drivers, the choices "we users" face are:
> > - closed source drivers with closed source OS
> > - closed source drivers with open
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, David Greaves wrote:
That's not a bad thing - until you look at the complexity it brings - and
then consider the impact and exceptions when you do, eg hardware
acceleration? md information fed up to the fs layer for xfs? simple long term
maintenance?
Often these
On Saturday 16 June 2007 02:20, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Ok, so mv gets slower for big trees... and open() gets faster for deep
> trees. Previously, open in current directory was one atomic read of
> directory entry, now it has to read directory, and its parent, and its
> parent parent, and its...
>
Bjorn,
You have the following registers to consider (for P4/Core):
#define MSR_IA32_PEBS_ENABLE0x03f1
#define MSR_CORE_PERF_FIXED_CTR00x0309
#define MSR_CORE_PERF_FIXED_CTR10x030a
#define MSR_CORE_PERF_FIXED_CTR20x030b
#define
Hello! I'm a newbuy in kernel development.
Now I'm just trying to find out what is going in it =).
I noticed this:
(BTW. There is a new category called "Will be fixed in 2.6.23")
Is it really important to release 2.6.22 as soon as possible? I think
kernel should be 99% stable. Why not to wait
On Friday 22 June 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> > - Interface for preallocating hugetlbfs pages per node instead of system
> > wide
>
> We may want to get a bit higher level than that. General way of
> controlling subsystem use on nodes. One
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:55:49AM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
>
> This is already on linux-arm-kernel, the best place to find people
> who do Linux on ARM.
I see... but after looking at ARM changes I find nothing useful to
resolve the problem, that's why I decided to write here also.
Ciao,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:34:36AM +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> I just updated my linux tree from 2.6.20-rc6 to 2.6.22-rc3 for my
> custom PXA270 based board and I discovered that now sleep/wakeup
> functionality doesn't work anymore! :'(
This is already on linux-arm-kernel, the best place to
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:30:48PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > From: Joerg Roedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > This patch adds an implementation to the svm is_disabled function to
> > detect reliably if the BIOS disabled the SVM feature in the CPU. This
> > fixes the issues
Joerg Roedel wrote:
> From: Joerg Roedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This patch adds an implementation to the svm is_disabled function to
> detect reliably if the BIOS disabled the SVM feature in the CPU. This
> fixes the issues with kernel panics when loading the kvm-amd module on
> machines where
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:30:04AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
...
> It's probably mainly because my contribution (i.e. some comas)
> is untranslatable!
After full awakening I've recalled there were a few very nice commas
as well!
Jarek P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On 2007-06-21T23:45:36, Joshua Brindle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >remember, the policies define a white-list
>
> Except for unconfined processes.
The argument that AA doesn't mediate what it is not configured to
mediate is correct, yes, but I don't think that's a valid _design_ issue
with
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:01:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
...
> So I don't see how you could possibly having two different CPU's getting
> into some lock-step in that loop: changing "task_rq()" is a really quite
> heavy operation (it's
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:33:13AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 04:41:28PM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
> > > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > Talk is cheap, but unless YOU will do it your emails will only be a
> > > > waste of bandwidth.
> > >
> > > Thanks, and good
* Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > which actual in-kernel tasklets do you have in mind? I'm not aware
> > of any in performance critical code. (now that both the RCU and the
> > sched tasklet has been fixed.)
>
> the one in megaraid_sas for example is in a performance-critical
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 04:35:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> In http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8659, Dustin is reporting
> that this patch broke tcp-on-ipv6.
Oops. Two instructions operating on the 'len' arg ($18) got swapped...
This should fix ev6 version, ev5 one seems to be ok.
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:17 +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2007-06-21T16:59:54, Stephen Smalley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Or can access the data under a different path to which their profile
> > does give them access, whether in its final destination or in some
> > temporary file
On 2007-06-22T07:19:39, Stephen Smalley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Or can access the data under a different path to which their profile
> > > does give them access, whether in its final destination or in some
> > > temporary file processed along the way.
> > Well, yes. That is intentional.
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 21:34 +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Friday June 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes. Your use case is different than mine.
> >
> > My use case is being able to protect data reliably. Yours?
>
> Saying "protect data" is nearly meaningless without a threat model.
>
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:39:50 +0300
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We have patches for "very high non-preempt latency in
> > context_struct_compute_av()" and "list_add corruption. prev->next
> > should be next (f7d28794), but was f0df8ed4 (prev=f0df8ed4) Kernel Bug
> > at
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 01:06 -0700, John Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 04:59:54PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 21:54 +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> > > On 2007-06-21T15:42:28, James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > And now, yes, I know
401 - 500 of 831 matches
Mail list logo
