Re: source line numbers with x86_64 modules? [Was: Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact]

2009-01-10 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Andi Kleen wrote: I think that's mostly because kexec from arbitary context is a somewhat unstable concept. I think that's the understatement of the year. We have tons of problems with standard suspend-to-ram, and that's when the suspend sequence has done its best to

Re: source line numbers with x86_64 modules? [Was: Re: [patch] measurements, numbers about CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y impact]

2009-01-10 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: As far as I'm concerned, digital cameras have been more useful than kernel dumps to kernel debugging. Yes, especially ones with VGA video capture. (I caught a oops+triple-fault crash via that trick once, which was not serial-console

Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

2009-01-10 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Linus Torvalds wrote: Actually, the real spin locks are now fair. We use ticket locks on x86. Well, at least we do unless you enable that broken paravirt support. I'm not at all clear on why CONFIG_PARAVIRT wants to use inferior locks, but I don't much care. No, it will continue to use

Re: Btrfs is now in mainline!

2009-01-10 Thread Daniel Phillips
Congratulations Chris, you richly deserve this. And best of luck with the real work, which begins now ;-) Regards, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at