On 26 Mar 2009, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub spake thusly:
> Network doesn't seem to work for me in 2.6.29, although it was working
> in 2.6.28. System behavior seemed really strange, as it sometimes did
> work when I was using the same uml machine, when using a different
> user. Bisecting the kernel tre
On 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 07:14:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> It comes with glibc, and even ls uses it (for clock_gettime(), to
>> determine what format to use for date display).
>>
>> I'd say using it is about as sa
On 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> Index: linux-2.6.22/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c
Does this really only apply on top of 2.6.22? Which of the bewildering
blizzard of time-fixup patches we've been exchanging do I need? :)
--
`If you are having a "ua luea luea le ua le" kind of day, I
On 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> Aha, I was looking at timer_* and not getting reasonable-looking
> results. The one questionable aspect of this is that I need to pull
> in a new library (librt) and I wonder how many people don't have it
> installed...
It comes with glibc, and even ls uses
On 3 Jun 2008, Daniel Hazelton said:
> On Tuesday 03 June 2008 03:32:11 pm Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:02:35 -0400
>>
>> Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Protection against the host's time going backwards - keep track of the
>> > time at the last tick and if it's greater
On 14 May 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 09:12:12PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> Oh, and, it's pedantic of me, I know, but what does this do if time goes
>> backwards in the NO_HZ case? (Or is handling that a 2.6.26 thing?)
>
> In all cases, it holds
[vincent-perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> removed from Cc;,
his MTA says `Client host rejected: AP0002 Please use your ISP mailserver'
only I don't *have* an ISP mailserver.]
On 14 May 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] verbalised:
> Annoyingly, now I've upgraded the host to 2.6.25 (hence sans skas3),
> timings
On 14 May 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> I finally reproduced this using 2.6.25.1 (2.6.25-mm1 was no good) with
> your config.
YAY! (I wonder why this was so .config-dependent? You'd think it would
trigger on anything, but I couldn't even make it happen on all my
hosts...)
> The patch below fixes
On 9 May 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] verbalised:
> The download is long, the untar too, but the freeze is garanteed!
If this doesn't work I can give you an account on, hm, the box which
freezes uses a UML for its network link so if you flip the time on it
you'd get cut off... and on the other machine
On 7 May 2008, Bram Matthys said:
> Or any help on how to get additional / useful info?
Set
CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y
CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER=y
in your kernel, and recompile. `bt' will then show heaps more info.
--
`If you are having a "ua luea luea le ua le" kind of day, I can only
assume that you ar
On 6 May 2008, Andrew Morton uttered the following:
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 17:44:35 -0400
> Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 01:46:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > This fix was already present in your "[PATCH 4/19] UML - Random driver
>> > fixes".
>>
>> Ah, so
On 3 May 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:21:15AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> With this patch (migrating most of the work into os_nsecs(), with a
>> non-NO_HZ version doing skew computations too, atop your first patch,
>> and making a couple of variables static
On 2 May 2008, Jeff Dike stated:
> On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 07:55:11PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> I'm trying something else now, arranging for os_nsecs() itself to do the
>> never-backwards stuff on the assumption that something depends on
>> monotonic timers not skipping back
On 2 May 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> With your config, I'm seeing a hang until the system time catches up
> to what UML thought it should have been in the first place. But it's
> only a few seconds, not forever.
This is true sometimes, but not always: I just tried twice and got
a rapid recovery
On 1 May 2008, Jeff Dike outgrape:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:49:27PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> Done, and tested by stepping the time (five seconds --- five seconds per
>> day! I have pendulum clocks that keep better time than that!), and,
>> oops, instant loop as before, with
On 28 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 07:31:44PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> The cause of this is almost certainly time-skewing on the *host* via
>> adjtimex(). I stopped ntpd and there were no problems for half a day: I
>> restarted it, and as soon as ntpd
On 25 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike stated, in part:
> Index: linux-2.6-git/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6-git.orig/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c2008-04-25
> 10:42:12.0 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6-git/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c
On 26 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
>
>> On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
>>
>>> I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
>>> CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp tha
On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
>
>> I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
>> CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp that did it. (My ADSL
>> router pretty much bombs the poor damn mach
On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
> I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
> CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp that did it. (My ADSL
> router pretty much bombs the poor damn machine with ARP packets all the
> time.)
Woo, it's happening a lot
I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp that did it. (My ADSL
router pretty much bombs the poor damn machine with ARP packets all the
time.)
#0 getnstimeofday (ts=0x8217d10) at include/linux/time.h:182
#1 0x080824b4 in
On 24 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> OK, yell if it starts happening again...
I tempted fate, and lo, it happens within the hour...
(gdb) bt
#0 0x08083e3a in getnstimeofday ()
I will now do what I should have done long since and turn on frame
pointers and debugging info so I can g
On 16 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated:
> This *is* a change in behaviour: the backtrace is different! Yay! :)
I upgraded the guest to 2.6.25 a week ago and it stopped happening.
There is hope. (Mind you it's stopped going wrong for week-long periods
before...)
--
`If you are having a "ua lue
On 15 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> OK, trying that. (I'll extend the instrumentation patch to watch for
> zero cycle_interval as well, and see what happens. With luck nothing
> will happen except that the crashes will stop... except that they
> already *have* stopped for me. Annoying.)
Hard
On 14 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike spake thusly:
> Below is another patch for you to try. I spent most of last week
> chasing this one. The symptoms are somewhat similar to yours -
> intermittent UML hangs, although not with UML spinning, and it still
> pings.
Having not quite the same symptoms is intere
The fixed timer patch you posted a few weeks back has indeed fixed my
select()-based timeout woes.
Unfortunately, both with the old kludgy approach and with the new
remain-versus-max estimator code, I see intermittent tight lockups of
the UML kernel-space ptrace thread, with that thread chewing al
On 18 Mar 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> This version keeps track of the time between ticks (as reported by the
> host's gettimeofday) and adjusts its sleeping and reporting ticks
> accordingly.
I can confirm that, as expected, this patch works well enough that
timing problems don't break dhclient a
On 18 Mar 2008, Jeff Dike outgrape:
> Below is another patch.
>
> I was hurt and disappointed by your
>> Eew. :)
> so I got rid of the 9/10 thing.
Yay! That's much less dependent on the exact nature of whatever the
underlying bug is :) a random 9/10, well, it just makes my skin itch
even if i
On 17 Mar 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> Below is the same patch with another kluge, which cuts down the
> requested sleep by 10% in hopes of getting the actual sleep closer to
> what's wanted.
Eew. :)
> This is unusable in anything resembling mainline, but I'd like to see
> how your various
On 15 Feb 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> The smoking gun - a poll that should have timed out in .5 sec slept
> for 12.
FWIW this breaks all sorts of things, as one might expect: obviously it
breaks select() as well as poll(). For me the symptoms were a failure of
DHCP and spontaneous dropping off th
On 8 Dec 2007, Karol Swietlicki outgrape:
> I can't wait to test this.
WORKSFORME, nice and fast again just in time for weeks of unattended
operation as I head out for a nice long Newtonmass break. :)
(so it had better not crash! ;} )
--
`The rest is a tale of post and counter-post.' --- Ian Ra
On 22 Oct 2007, WANG Cong uttered the following:
> I build UML for non-SMP x86. But I don't know about UML_NET_VDE. ;(
>
> Errors threw out by gcc (too many) are put here:
> http://wangcong.org/down/errors.txt
It's hard to tell without LOCALE=C, but those are the sorts of results
I'd expect
On 20 Oct 2007, Paolo Giarrusso told this:
> Guess most people are not using SMP right now, and that the error disappears
> without that setting
It doesn't. It fails with non-SMP as well.
Rob, your patch works for me. (Not that the reboot into 2.6.23.1 was
problem-free: iproute2-071016 fails to
Without this commit, you can't compile UML on a system with 2.6.22
kernel headers (the reserved2 and reserved3 fields have been
renamed). With it, you can use 2.6.22 or older as you like.
(not forwarding to -stable because it seems importunate of me to do so:
is this being too cautious?)
--
`Som
On 13 Jul 2007, Jeff Dike outgrape:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 08:00:13PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> This feels like a -stable candidate to me.
>
> Right you are - that's the first place I sent it.
Ah. So, first I report a bug two days *after* you post a fix, and then I
recommend y
On 13 Jul 2007, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> COWed devices can't handle more than 32 (64 on x86_64) sectors in one
> request due to the size of the bitmap being carried around in the
> io_thread_req.
This feels like a -stable candidate to me.
---
On 12 Jul 2007, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:55:46PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> ... aaand Jeff solved it two days ago and I didn't notice. Er, oops?
>
> Heh - it's good to have this in the list archives anyway. The only
> other place you
On 12 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated:
> My firewall has long been a UML instance sitting atop a COW-backed UBD,
> with the UBD being marked immutable and sha1-checked against a copy
> on a CD-R every boot.
... aaand Jeff solved it two days ago and I didn't notice. Er, oops?
Here, have a skas-
My firewall has long been a UML instance sitting atop a COW-backed UBD,
with the UBD being marked immutable and sha1-checked against a copy
on a CD-R every boot.
Now 2.6.22.1 (and probably 2.6.22 as well) gives me a panic on boot
which 2.6.21.* did not. Here's the complete boot log, ending with th
On 1 Dec 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On 29 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
>> arch/um/os-Linux/start_up.o is in USER_OBJS, so it is compiled against host
>> headers.
>> You cannot _depend_ on them including the SKAS patch, as I said. And that
>> header is
On 29 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 22:03, Nix wrote:
>> This diff removes references to the conflicting-with-kernel-headers
>> skas_ptrace.h, and moves skas_ptrace.h into the um header
>> tree.
> Unaccurate - you move sk
On 29 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] verbalised:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 22:02, Nix wrote:
>> However, other problems are so-far undescribed. There's one trivial one
>> (fixed in patch 3 in this series, should be uncontroversial).
> Agreed.
Oh good, that's the
Another bug revealed by `make headers_install'ed header files.
Signed-off-by: Nick Alcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/stub.h |1 +
arch/um/include/sysdep-x86_64/stub.h |1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/s
This diff removes references to the conflicting-with-kernel-headers
skas_ptrace.h, and moves skas_ptrace.h into the um header
tree. There are still some trees (PPC, IA64) with a copy of a
skas_ptrace.h left and without ptrace-skas.h broken off from
ptrace.h: these may be broken by this change, but
This diff applies against a kernel with the skas patch applied. It
splits ptrace.h into two pieces, one SKAS and one non-SKAS, and removes
a now-unused #define: I can reroll the skas patch accordingly if you
want, but the change is so trivial that it may not be worth it. It
needs to be on the guest
I recently upgraded my glibc to 2.5, and upgraded the userspace headers
at the same time. As a result, I've had several problems with UML.
One of these Jeff has seen reported and fixed, although the correct
cause was not described (the #inclusion of instead of
in user-offsets.c).
However, other
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stipulated:
> I'm starting to get sick of udev - on Ubuntu currently I'm unable to compile
> a
> vanilla kernel that works (I must still do more complete tests but I'm
> already beyond the "I've misconfigured something" moment).
All udev needs is CONFIG_HO
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok, I missed one important bit of info. Plus, MARC archives when searching
> for
> author don't support restricting to one ML. So, here's the link to the
> discussion within UML-devel. Which is just a pointer to the issue (he surely
> doesn't expl
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake:
> On Sunday 25 June 2006 21:19, Nix wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
>> > On Wednesday 21 June 2006 21:38, Nix wrote:
>>
>> [jmp_buf goes hidden]
>
>> > I made th
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
> On Wednesday 21 June 2006 21:38, Nix wrote:
[jmp_buf goes hidden]
>> This vile patch lets me compile but is almost certainly not good enough:
>> however, I don't know what *is* good enough: now that glibc is
The problem is that arch/um/os-Linux/sys-i386/registers.c
messes around inside a jmp_buf, and in glibc 2.4 the glibc
maintainers have helpfully removed the definitions that
let you poke around in there (they were only there for the
sake of one macro, _JMPBUF_UNWINDS, which is no longer
user-visible
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] whispered secretively:
> On Sunday 11 December 2005 07:34, Rob Landley wrote:
>> On Friday 09 December 2005 12:39, Antoine Martin wrote:
>> > I wasn't even thinking about that! So true, why on earth would fsck
>> > require threading!?
It doesn't, at least not
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, Rob Landley prattled cheerily:
> If you're using udev, then /dev is tmpfs. So /dev/shm is trivially tmpfs.
True enough; but some people mount /dev with a size of 0. (Admittedly if
they don't want to break POSIX shm they'd better damn well mount *another*
tmpfs on /dev/shm wit
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] whispered secretively:
> Plus, for deep troubleshooting (mainly for kernels) init=/bin/sh is useful.
init=/bin/busybox/sh is also useful for those cases when you've futzed
your libc. :)
>> > No - the kernel doesn't allow storing the full set of infos which a
t;> Some french disk archiving tool, apparently. I generally just use tarballs
>> or rsync.
>
> It's clear Nix is using some calculation program (not sure what's it).
I'm using both matlab/octave *and*, when running backups, said French disk
archiver. The source is gradual
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] whispered secretively:
> It's not a file, it's a AF_UNIX socket bound there - and bind() fails if the
> file exists. So it's a different story (I was puzzled by a missing
> bind(O_EXCL), but I learned with trial there's no need).
There's an (optional) abstr
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Rob Landley murmured woefully:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 20:12, Nix wrote:
>> If it's a problem you have both hostile users and no size limits on /tmp
>> and you therefore have bigger problems anyway. :)
>
> The size limits on /tmp aren't p
[Sorry for response delay, steaming cold/flu]
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley worried:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 15:04, Nix wrote:
>> The ~/.kde directory doesn't contain temporary files, but persistent state:
>
> ~/.kde/share/apps/kmail/lock is persistent state?
No, b
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 22:04, Nix wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley moaned:
>> > On Friday 25 November 2005 13:33, Nix wrote:
>
>> > Actually, I consider the fact the OOM killer doesn&#x
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley moaned:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 13:33, Nix wrote:
>> Maybe this is a stupid question, but... why do *any* systems other than
>> extremely memory-constrained ones not mount tmpfs on /tmp? It seems to
>> me to have numerous advantages
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley uttered the following:
> A) mlock would be a bad thing. Not only is it a trivial DOS waiting to
> happen
> but I like the UML physmem being swapped out under memory pressure. I just
> don't want uselessly writing it to disk over and over in the absence of any
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Chris Lightfoot murmured woefully:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 02:56:49PM +0000, Nix wrote:
>> You could certainly do just that with POSIX shm :)
>
> Another option is to mlock the memory, which should
> prevent paging, but requires root. I have a patch which
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Rob Landley uttered the following:
> There is a tmpfs mount, it's /dev/shm. And apparently, even if tmpfs isn't
> exposed as a separate filesystem, system V shared memory will still use it.
s/System V/POSIX/
It's the shm_open()/shm_close()shm_unlink() functions you're looki
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Monday 21 November 2005 04:25, Nix wrote:
>> I hope linux-libc-headers isn't dead. It looked like it was turning into
>> a very good aggregation point, with patches coming in from Ubuntu and RH
>> among others.
>
> Ho
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] moaned:
> On Monday 14 November 2005 14:59, Nix wrote:
>> I've long wanted to do the same sort of thing,
>
> I guess you would like to run userspace processes or at least to call libUML
> to configure something (but I don't thin
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Jeff Dike prattled cheerily:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:09:06AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
>> > So I don't care about systemcall interception or anything like that,
>>
>> *blink* *blink*
>>
>> Ok, you want user mode linux, but you don't want it to actually run user
>> proce
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 21:47, Nix wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] suggested tentatively:
>> > On Tuesday 07 June 2005 18:21, Nix wrote:
>> >> OK, so it's a -static TT build that's failing
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] suggested tentatively:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 18:21, Nix wrote:
>> OK, so it's a -static TT build that's failing?
> Exactly.
Built, with a randomly selected .config (that is, a .config I use for
other things, not a .config with th
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollably:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 17:54, Nix wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> > On Tuesday 07 June 2005 16:31, Nix wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollabl
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Just give me the time to actually upload the tree, which I'm doing at the
> moment, and forgive me if I added anything ruining the compilation while I
> was working on x86_64 host.
Patch mis-rolled, I guess: arch/um/scripts/Makefile.rules is missing,
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 16:31, Nix wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollably:
>> > Ok, I hope there is still somebody using UML on a NPTL-only system. The
>> > workaround suggested last
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollably:
> Ok, I hope there is still somebody using UML on a NPTL-only system. The
> workaround suggested last time was to avoid enabling CONFIG_MODE_TT; now I
> think I've got over this problem, too. So, when I release 2.6.11.8-bs6 (which
>
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] moaned:
> For most applications, the mention address-space is mapped to
> linux-gate.so, which to my understanding is a part of sysenter/tls
> implementation in glibc.
It is the vsyscall implementation; it's exported by the kernel,
not by glibc.
--
This is
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Rob Landley said:
> This doesn't work:
>
> ./linux rootfstype=hostfs rw init=/bin/ls -l > out.txt &
Well, it blocks.
It looks like UML is reading from stdin at some point (I haven't
looked to find out where; I suppose I should).
--
This is like system("/usr/funky/bin/perl
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Rob Landley yowled:
> On Sunday 09 January 2005 08:53 pm, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Rob Landley wrote:
>> > I wonder if that old hack (deleting the file signalling there's no rush
>> > about writing stuff back to the disk anymore, although it's still your
>
75 matches
Mail list logo
