Re: [take8 2/2] kevent: poll/select() notifications. Timer notifications.

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 08:45:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: +static struct lock_class_key kevent_poll_key; + +void kevent_poll_reinit(struct file *file) +{ + lockdep_set_class(file-st.lock, kevent_poll_key); +} Why is this necessary? Locks for all storages

Re: [take8 2/2] kevent: poll/select() notifications. Timer notifications.

2006-08-12 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:18:35 +0400 Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 08:45:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: +static struct lock_class_key kevent_poll_key; + +void kevent_poll_reinit(struct file *file) +{ +

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 11:42:50PM -0400, Rik van Riel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Dropping these non-essential packets makes sure the reserve memory doesn't get stuck in some random blocked user-space process, hence you can make progress. In short: - every incoming packet needs to be

[PATCH,RESEND] smc91x: disable DMA mode on the logicpd pxa270

2006-08-12 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
Enabling PXA DMA for the smc91x on the logicpd pxa270 produces unacceptable interference with the TFT panel, so disable it. Also delete the lpd270 versions of the SMC_{in,out}[bl]() macros, as they aren't used, since the board only supports 16bit accesses. Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek [EMAIL

[PATCH] Add new PHY to sis900 supported list

2006-08-12 Thread Daniele Venzano
Please include the attached patch that adds support for a new PHY to the sis900 driver. See also Bugzilla 6919. Signed-off-by: Daniele Venzano [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- Daniele Venzano Web: http://teg.homeunix.org diff -urN linux-source-2.6.15/drivers/net/sis900.c

Re: [PATCH,RESEND] smc91x: disable DMA mode on the logicpd pxa270

2006-08-12 Thread Muli Ben-Yehuda
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 10:55:07AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: Enabling PXA DMA for the smc91x on the logicpd pxa270 produces unacceptable interference with the TFT panel, so disable it. Doesn't this disable it for all users, though? are there any other users? should this be changed from a

Re: [PATCH,RESEND] smc91x: disable DMA mode on the logicpd pxa270

2006-08-12 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 12:27:52PM +0300, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: Enabling PXA DMA for the smc91x on the logicpd pxa270 produces unacceptable interference with the TFT panel, so disable it. Doesn't this disable it for all users, though? Nope. Unfortunately, the line that made that clear

Re: [PATCH,RESEND] smc91x: disable DMA mode on the logicpd pxa270

2006-08-12 Thread Muli Ben-Yehuda
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:30:35AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: Nope. Unfortunately, the line that made that clear didn't fall inside the patch context: Ah, I see. Thanks. Cheers, Muli - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL

Re: [PATCH -mm] constify Tigon3 ether firmware structs

2006-08-12 Thread Jeff Garzik
Andreas Mohr wrote: Constify largish areas of firmware data in Tigon3 ethernet driver. ACK - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [NETLINK]: Handle NLM_F_ECHO in netlink_rcv_skb()

2006-08-12 Thread Alexey Kuznetsov
Hello! Makes sense, especially for auto generated handles. I've been listening to the notifications on a separate socket for this purpose. That's... complicated. But cool. :-) It does make sense, the way it has been implemented if at all is creepy. Even worse, IPv6 is using current-pid,

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [NETLINK]: Handle NLM_F_ECHO in netlink_rcv_skb()

2006-08-12 Thread Alexey Kuznetsov
Hello! Actually I think the only safe solution is to allocate a separate socket for multicast messages. In other words, if you want reliable unicast reception on a socket, don't bind it to a multicast group. Yes, it was the point of my advocacy of NLM_F_ECHO. :-) Alexey - To unsubscribe

Re: [PATCH 1/4] [NETLINK]: Handle NLM_F_ECHO in netlink_rcv_skb()

2006-08-12 Thread Thomas Graf
* Alexey Kuznetsov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-12 15:03 Actually, it was the idea. If requestor asked NLM_F_ECHO and subscribed to muticasts, it suppresses double notifications. If it did not ask NLM_F_ECHO, he is not interested in results, he knows what's going on without this. F.e. it was

Re: [PATCH] move skb-dev assignment into netdev_alloc_skb

2006-08-12 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 05:29:54PM -0700, Jesse Brandeburg wrote: On 8/7/06, David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 15:01:09 +0200 All caller of netdev_alloc_skb need to assign skb-dev shortly afterwards. Move it into common

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday 12 August 2006 15:39, Jeff Garzik wrote: Andrew Morton wrote: It would be good if you could poke around in gdb, work out exactly which statement it's oopsing at, please. I'm also interested to know if the problem goes away when you disable preempt... That will take some time

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Rik van Riel
Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:19:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: As you described above, memory for each packet must be allocated (either from SLAB or from reserve), so network needs special allocator in OOM condition, and that allocator should be

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Jeff Garzik
Peter Zijlstra wrote: Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/gfp.h 2006-08-12 12:56:06.0 +0200 +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h 2006-08-12 12:56:09.0 +0200 @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 10:40:23AM -0400, Rik van Riel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:19:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: As you described above, memory for each packet must be allocated (either from SLAB or from reserve),

Re: How does Linux do RTTM?

2006-08-12 Thread John Richard Moser
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 09:31:42AM -0400, John Richard Moser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm told now that it uses Jiffies for TCP timestamps. I've had thoughts on this: - I figured a random timestamp with random

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Rik van Riel
Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 10:40:23AM -0400, Rik van Riel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:19:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: As you described above, memory for each packet must be allocated (either from

rename *MEMALLOC flags (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core)

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 10:41 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/gfp.h 2006-08-12 12:56:06.0 +0200 +++

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 10:56:31AM -0400, Rik van Riel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Yep. Socket allocations end up with alloc_skb() which is essentialy the same as what is being done for receiving path skbs. If you really want to separate critical from non-critical sockets, it is much better

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 19:08 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: One must receive a packet to determine if that packet must be dropped until tricky hardware with header split capabilities or MMIO copying is used. True, that is done, but we then discard this packet at the very first moment we know

Re: rename *MEMALLOC flags (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core)

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 17:06, Peter Zijlstra said: On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 10:41 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: Peter Zijlstra wrote: Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h === --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/gfp.h 2006-08-12

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Edgar E. Iglesias
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 04:31:18PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Saturday 12 August 2006 14:28, Andrew Morton wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:07:42 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 with hotfixes I get things like the appended one on

Re: [PATCH 3/6] ehea: queue management

2006-08-12 Thread Thomas Klein
Anton Blanchard wrote: Hi, --- linux-2.6.18-rc4-orig/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_ethtool.c 1969-12-31 +static void netdev_get_pauseparam(struct net_device *dev, + struct ethtool_pauseparam *pauseparam) +{ + printk(get pauseparam\n); +} There

Re: [PATCH 4/6] ehea: header files

2006-08-12 Thread Thomas Klein
Anton Blanchard wrote: --- linux-2.6.18-rc4-orig/drivers/net/ehea/ehea.h 1969-12-31 +extern void exit(int); Should be able to remove that prototype :) Anton Indeed :-) It's gone. Thomas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 16:14, Peter Zijlstra said: Hi, here the latest effort, it includes a whole new trivial allocator with a horrid name and an almost full rewrite of the deadlock prevention core. This version does not do anything per device and hence does not depend on the new

[PATCH] zd1211rw: ZD1211B ASIC/FWT, not jointly decoder

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
The vendor driver chooses this value based on an ifndef ASIC, and ASIC is never defined. Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This should go into 2.6.18 as it fixed TX on one of my devices. zd_chip.c |2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) Index:

[PATCH] zd1211rw: Match vendor driver IFS values

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
The vendor driver resets the IFS value every time the channel changes, to this one. Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- zd_chip.c | 11 +++ zd_chip.h |8 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Index:

[PATCH] zd1211rw: AL2230 ZD1211B vendor sync

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
This patch synchronizes our code to some recent vendor driver modifications. A new PHY layout is supported, some values are tweaked, and the AL2230 is now programmed over a new interface which is many times faster. Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Index:

[PATCH] zd1211rw: Add ID for Allnet ALLSPOT Hotspot finder

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
Tested by Wonka on IRC. zd1211 chip 157e:3204 v4810 high 00-11-e0 AL7230B_RF pa0 g--- Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- zd_usb.c |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_usb.c

[PATCH] zd1211rw: Add ID for Senao NUB-8301

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
Tested by lyakh on IRC zd1211 chip 1740:2000 v4721 high 00-02-6f AL7230B_RF pa0 g--- Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- zd_usb.c |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/zd_usb.c b/zd_usb.c index 044f209..5284357 100644 ---

[PATCH] zd1211rw: Firmware version vs bootcode version mismatch handling

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
This is needed for my G220F, otherwise it fails to initialize after the existing firmware upload routine. The vendor driver actually does more than what I have done here: it downloads the firmware + boot code, modifies it, and uploads it again (really messy). I have not copied that part over, as

[PATCH] zd1211rw: Support AL7230B RF

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
This patch adds support for another Airoha RF which is present in some ZD1211 adapters. This RF supports 802.11a as well as 802.11b/g, but 802.11a connectivity is not yet supported by this driver. Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Index:

[PATCH] zd1211rw: Add ID for ZyXEL G220F

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
zd1211 chip 0586:3402 v4916 high 00-13-49 AL2230_RF pa0 This device pops up after the virtual driver CD has been ejected. Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- zd_usb.c |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Index:

[PATCH] zd1211rw: USB id 1582:6003 for Longshine 8131G3 added

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
From: Ulrich Kunitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Longshine device is a ZD1211B and has a AL2230 RF. I tested it successfully with no encryption and WEP. Signed-off-by: Ulrich Kunitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- zd_usb.c |1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+),

[PATCH] zd1211rw: cleanups

2006-08-12 Thread Daniel Drake
From: Ulrich Kunitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add static to 2 internal functions. Thanks goes to Adrian Bunk, who found that. Also made some modifications to the clear functions: After a discussion on the mailing list, I implemented this code to have on the one hand sufficient test in debug mode, but

Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_PM=n slim: drivers/net/*

2006-08-12 Thread Roland Dreier
Also this won't allow struct pci_driver { ... #ifdef CONFIG_PM int (*suspend)(...); int (*resume)(...); #endif ... }; which is good for a) space savings in CONFIG_PM=n case, and b) making drivers care

Re: pci=routeirq solves EHCI-problem

2006-08-12 Thread Chris Wedgwood
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 04:27:41PM +0200, Lutz Urban wrote: I'm sorry to tell you that my previous message was bogus. The problem still persists. Daniel Drake has posted a fix that's in -mm you can try. It's probably the least painful solution to date, can you please try that:

Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_PM=n slim: drivers/net/*

2006-08-12 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 10:06:29 -0700 Roland Dreier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also this won't allow struct pci_driver { ... #ifdef CONFIG_PM int (*suspend)(...); int (*resume)(...); #endif ... }; which is good

[RFC][NET::SCHED]: cleanup qdisc_restart

2006-08-12 Thread jamal
Folks, I am not a big readability officianado, but this piece of code has become a victim of hairy activities over the last few years. So while i was furiously chasing Herbert's qdisc_is_running changes[1] i made a small cleanup just so that i could absorb what was going on. The patch included

[PATCH] cleanup of the NETIF_F_* flag definitions

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Cleanup the NETIF_F_ flag definitions Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/linux/netdevice.h | 26 ++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/netdevice.h

Re: Stackable devices.

2006-08-12 Thread Ben Greear
Christophe Devriese wrote: It would however be considerable effort to do this. Is this going to end up unapplied like my last patch, or ? I don't get to make this decision..and when I ask such questions...they are usually ignored unless I also post a working patch I think you could start

Re: Stackable devices.

2006-08-12 Thread Ben Greear
Christophe Devriese wrote: It would however be considerable effort to do this. Is this going to end up unapplied like my last patch, or ? I don't get to make this decision..and when I ask such questions...they are usually ignored unless I also post a working patch I think you could start

Re: [PATCH] cleanup of the NETIF_F_* flag definitions

2006-08-12 Thread Jeff Garzik
Peter Zijlstra wrote: Cleanup the NETIF_F_ flag definitions Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you are going to do a cleanup here, you should use the form that makes it _immediately_ obvious which bit(s) are being used: #define NETIF_F_SG (1 0) #define NETIF_F_IP_CSUM

Re: [2.6.17.8] NFS stall / BUG in UDP fragment processing / SKB trimming

2006-08-12 Thread Nix
On 12 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] mused: Then the build froze. I couldn't very well ignore *that*. Perhaps I couldn't blame XEmacs after all. It just happened again. It's reproducibly triggered, at least on this system, by the ocaml-3.09.02 configure script running over NFS (probably NFS over

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread David Miller
From: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:18:07 +0200 65535 sockets * 128 packets * 16384 bytes/packet = 1^16 * 1^7 * 1^14 = 1^(16+7+14) = 1^37 = 128G of memory per IP And systems with a lot of IP numbers are not unthinkable. TCP restricts the amount of global memory

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread David Miller
From: Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:37:06 +0400 Does it? I though it is possible to only have 64k of working sockets per device in TCP. Where does this limit come from? You think there is something magic about 64K local ports, but if remote IP addresses in the

Re: [take8 1/2] kevent: Core files.

2006-08-12 Thread Jeff Carr
On 08/11/06 01:40, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: +/* + * Inode events. + */ +#define KEVENT_INODE_CREATE 0x1 +#define KEVENT_INODE_REMOVE 0x2 It would be useful to have gnome/kde notification when hard drives start failing. There was some talk in the past about how to implement

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Rik van Riel
David Miller wrote: From: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:18:07 +0200 65535 sockets * 128 packets * 16384 bytes/packet = 1^16 * 1^7 * 1^14 = 1^(16+7+14) = 1^37 = 128G of memory per IP And systems with a lot of IP numbers are not unthinkable. TCP restricts the

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 20:16:03 +0200 Edgar E. Iglesias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 07:13:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: Apparently it doesn't. Hi, could you try and see if this helps? Best regards That looks good, but needs a few more changes for full safety.

Re: [take8 2/2] kevent: poll/select() notifications. Timer notifications.

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 01:38:35AM -0700, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:18:35 +0400 Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 08:45:31AM -0700, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: +static struct lock_class_key

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 12:47 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 11:42:50PM -0400, Rik van Riel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Dropping these non-essential packets makes sure the reserve memory doesn't get stuck in some random blocked user-space process, hence you can make

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:19:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: As you described above, memory for each packet must be allocated (either from SLAB or from reserve), so network needs special allocator in OOM condition, and that allocator should be separated from SLAB's

2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
Hi, On 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 with hotfixes I get things like the appended one on attempts to suspend to disk. It occurs while devices are being suspended and is fairly reproducible. Greetings, Rafael Suspending device :01:00.0 Suspending device :02:02.0 Suspending device :02:01.4

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 13:37 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:19:49AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: As you described above, memory for each packet must be allocated (either from SLAB or from reserve), so network needs special allocator in OOM

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 12:18:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Does it? I though it is possible to only have 64k of working sockets per device in TCP. 65535 sockets * 128 packets * 16384 bytes/packet = 1^16 * 1^7 * 1^14 = 1^(16+7+14) = 1^37 = 128G of memory per IP

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 02:42:26PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Hence the alternative allocator to use on tight memory conditions. If transferred to your implementation, then just steal some pages from SLAB when new network device is added and use them when OOM

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 14:42 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: When network uses the same allocator, it depends on it, and thus it is possible to have (cut by you) a situation when reserve (which depends on SLAB and it's OOM too) is not filled or even does not exist. No, the reserve does not

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/9] Network receive deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 01:40:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 14:42 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: When network uses the same allocator, it depends on it, and thus it is possible to have (cut by you) a situation when reserve (which depends on

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:07:42 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 with hotfixes I get things like the appended one on attempts to suspend to disk. It occurs while devices are being suspended and is fairly reproducible. Greetings, Rafael Suspending

Re: How does Linux do RTTM?

2006-08-12 Thread John Richard Moser
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Miller wrote: Please use netdev@vger.kernel.org for discussions about the linux networking implementation, not [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kay. I'm told now that it uses Jiffies for TCP timestamps. I've had thoughts on this: - I figured a

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Jeff Garzik
Andrew Morton wrote: It would be good if you could poke around in gdb, work out exactly which statement it's oopsing at, please. I'm also interested to know if the problem goes away when you disable preempt... Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev

Re: How does Linux do RTTM?

2006-08-12 Thread Evgeniy Polyakov
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 09:31:42AM -0400, John Richard Moser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm told now that it uses Jiffies for TCP timestamps. I've had thoughts on this: - I figured a random timestamp with random microsecond skew would be nice but this might expose internals of the RNG;

[RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Hi, here the latest effort, it includes a whole new trivial allocator with a horrid name and an almost full rewrite of the deadlock prevention core. This version does not do anything per device and hence does not depend on the new netdev_alloc_skb() API. The reason to add a second allocator to

[RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
The core of the VM deadlock avoidance framework. From the 'user' side of things it provides a function to mark a 'struct sock' as SOCK_MEMALLOC, meaning this socket may dip into the memalloc reserves on the receive side. When *dev_alloc_skb() finds it cannot allocate a struct sk_buff the

[RFC][PATCH 4/4] deadlock prevention for NBD

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Use sk_set_memalloc() on the nbd socket. Limit each request to 1 page, so that the request throttling also limits the number of in-flight pages and force the IO scheduler to NOOP as anything else doesn't make sense anyway. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Daniel

[RFC][PATCH 1/4] pfn_to_kaddr() for UML

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Update UML with a proper 'pfn_to_kaddr()' definition, the SROG allocator uses it. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signed-off-by: Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/asm-um/page.h |2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) Index: linux-2.6/include/asm-um/page.h

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday 12 August 2006 14:28, Andrew Morton wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:07:42 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 with hotfixes I get things like the appended one on attempts to suspend to disk. It occurs while devices are being suspended

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday 12 August 2006 18:12, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 04:31:18PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Saturday 12 August 2006 14:28, Andrew Morton wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:07:42 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 16:14, Peter Zijlstra said: +struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask, int fclone) +{ + struct sk_buff *skb; + + skb = ___alloc_skb(size, gfp_mask ~__GFP_MEMALLOC, fclone); + + if (!skb (gfp_mask __GFP_MEMALLOC)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 18:51 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: On Sat, August 12, 2006 16:14, Peter Zijlstra said: Hi, here the latest effort, it includes a whole new trivial allocator with a horrid name and an almost full rewrite of the deadlock prevention core. This version does not do

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 19:31 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: On Sat, August 12, 2006 16:14, Peter Zijlstra said: +struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask, int fclone) +{ + struct sk_buff *skb; + + skb = ___alloc_skb(size, gfp_mask ~__GFP_MEMALLOC, fclone); + +

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 19:44, Peter Zijlstra said: Euhm, right :-) long comes naturaly when I think about quantities op pages. The adjust_memalloc_reserve() argument is an increment, a delta; perhaps I should change that to long. Maybe, but having 16 TB of reserved memory seems plenty for a

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 19:54 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: On Sat, August 12, 2006 19:44, Peter Zijlstra said: Euhm, right :-) long comes naturaly when I think about quantities op pages. The adjust_memalloc_reserve() argument is an increment, a delta; perhaps I should change that to long.

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Edgar E. Iglesias
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 07:13:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: Apparently it doesn't. Hi, could you try and see if this helps? Best regards -- Programmer Edgar E. Iglesias [EMAIL PROTECTED] 46.46.272.1946 Signed-off-by: Edgar E. Iglesias [EMAIL PROTECTED] diff --git

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 19:33, Peter Zijlstra said: Simpler yes, but also more complete; the old patches had serious issues with the alternative allocation scheme. It sure is more complete, and looks nicer, but the price is IMHO too high. I'm curious what those serious issues are, and if they

Kernel patches enabling better POSIX AIO (Was Re: [3/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile)

2006-08-12 Thread Suparna Bhattacharya
BTW, if anyone would like to be dropped off this growing cc list, please let us know. On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:45:55PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: Sébastien Dugué wrote: aio completion notification I looked over this now but I don't think I understand everything. Or I

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 20:08, Peter Zijlstra said: On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 19:54 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: True, but currently memalloc_reserve isn't used in a sensible way, or I'm missing something. Well, I'm somewhat reluctant to stick network related code into mm/, it seems well

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 20:32 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: On Sat, August 12, 2006 20:08, Peter Zijlstra said: On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 19:54 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: True, but currently memalloc_reserve isn't used in a sensible way, or I'm missing something. Well, I'm somewhat reluctant

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4

2006-08-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 20:16 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote: On Sat, August 12, 2006 19:33, Peter Zijlstra said: Simpler yes, but also more complete; the old patches had serious issues with the alternative allocation scheme. It sure is more complete, and looks nicer, but the price is IMHO too

Re: Kernel patches enabling better POSIX AIO (Was Re: [3/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile)

2006-08-12 Thread Ulrich Drepper
Suparna Bhattacharya wrote: I am wondering about that too. IIRC, the IO_NOTIFY_* constants are not part of the ABI, but only internal to the kernel implementation. I think Zach had suggested inferring THREAD_ID notification if the pid specified is not zero. But, I don't see why -sigev_notify

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday 12 August 2006 16:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Saturday 12 August 2006 15:39, Jeff Garzik wrote: Andrew Morton wrote: It would be good if you could poke around in gdb, work out exactly which statement it's oopsing at, please. I'm also interested to know if the problem

Re: 2.6.18-rc3-mm2 (+ hotfixes): GPF related to skge on suspend

2006-08-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday 12 August 2006 20:16, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 07:13:01PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: Apparently it doesn't. Hi, could you try and see if this helps? With the patch I can't reproduce the problem. I sometimes get the error messages from the interrupt

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 20:47, Peter Zijlstra said: Ah right, I did that in v3, with a similar comment, but I realised that the inbound reserve need not be per socket, and that the comment was ambiguous enough to allow this reading. True, but better to change the comment than to confuse

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4

2006-08-12 Thread Indan Zupancic
On Sat, August 12, 2006 20:54, Peter Zijlstra said: - single allocation group per packet - that is, when I free a packet and all its associated object I get my memory back. This is easy. - not waste too much space managing the various objects This too, when ignoring clones and COW. skb

[2.6.17.8] NFS stall / BUG in UDP fragment processing / SKB trimming

2006-08-12 Thread Nix
[Cc:ed to l-k and plausible maintainers: I'm not subscribed to netdev so, please, if you prune l-k, leave me in the Cc] I just upgraded to 2.6.17.8 (built with GCC 4.1.1 on x86 / Athlon IV). As luck would have it I made a bunch of other changes at the same time, namely that I LVMed my root