13246091201 vm86_32.o.before
4449 28 13246091201 vm86_32.o.after
md5:
e4e51ed7689d17f04148554a3c6d5bb6 vm86_32.o.before.asm
e4e51ed7689d17f04148554a3c6d5bb6 vm86_32.o.after.asm
Signed-off-by: Paolo Ciarrocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar
* Tejun Heo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ata_host_detach() detaches an attached port and shouldn't be called on
a port which hasn't been attached yet. pata_legacy incorrectly calls
ata_host_detach() on unattached port after initialization failure
causing oops. Fix it.
thanks, i'll try
* Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that one came from me, but it also gets over 14,000 hits on
google.
Now Jeff, here is the strange part. That error was killing me, many
times an hour and eventually crashing completely, repeatedly.
I applied that kernel argument
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ 27.097095] ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
[ 27.097287] ..TIMER: vector=0x31 apic1=0 pin1=2 apic2=-1 pin2=-1
[ 27.107291] ..MP-BIOS bug: 8254 timer not connected to IO-APIC
[ 27.107343] ...trying to set up timer (IRQ0) through the 8259A
* Gene Heskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe its the same, but lemme paste it for sure, yes:
[ 26.339926] ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
[ 26.340119] ..TIMER: vector=0x31 apic1=0 pin1=0 apic2=-1 pin2=-1
[ 26.350129] ..MP-BIOS bug: 8254 timer not connected to IO-APIC
[ 26.350182]
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue 2007-11-13 12:50:08, Mark Lord wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
for example git-bisect was godsent. I remember that
years ago bisection of a bug was a very laborous task
so that it was only used as a final, last-ditch
approach for really
* Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds
for all of us. I have one main complaint about networking: the
separate netdev list is a bad idea - networking regressions should
be discussed and fixed on lkml, like most other
* Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're assuming that everything in linux-2.6 was downloaded; that's
not true. Everything in linux-2.6/.git was downloaded; but then you
do a checkout which happens to approximately double the size of the
linux-2.6 directory.
..
Ah, I wondered why
* Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds
for all of us. I have one main complaint about networking
* Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:16:39 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
countered by the underlined sentences above, just in case you missed
it.
I didn't miss your claim.
ok, then you conceded it by not replying to it? good ;-)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe
* David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100
In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev
some of those bugs were already discussed and resolved. Had it been all
on lkml we'd all be aware
* James Bottomley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 11:56 -0800, David Miller wrote:
From: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100
In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev
some of those bugs were already
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you believe that our response to bug reports is adequate?
Do you feel that making us feel and look like shit helps?
That doesn't answer my question.
See, first we need to work out whether we have a problem. If we do
this, then we can
* Mark Lord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
..
This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for years,
in favor of the all-too-easy open source means many eyeballs and that is
our QA
* Benoit Boissinot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For debugging, maybe it's time someone does an amazon ec2+s3 service
to automate the bisecting and create .deb/.rpm from git, I don't know
how much it would cost though.
a few months ago i estimated the costs of this and it's just a few
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Right, but clock - sources/events need to be extremly late suspended and
early resumed. How can we ensure this ?
[...]
So the only thing that needs to be done is to make sure that we add
the timer
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Umm.. WHy not make the device tree look like this:
-- clocksource -- +-- HPET
|
+-- TSC
|
+-- i8259
-off-by: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/i386/kernel/hpet.c | 68
1 file changed, 68 insertions(+)
Index: linux/arch/i386/kernel/hpet.c
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Btw, what about arch/x86_64/kernel/hpet.c?
at least wrt. suspend/resume it should be fine, because in
arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c it does this upon resume:
static int timer_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
if (hpet_address)
* Maxim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I almost sure I know why this happens,
cool! Your patch is a definite improvement on my t60 (where
suspend/resume never worked with hpet enabled). But it does not fix
everything - for example the timings are way off after resume. Thomas?
Ingo
-
To
* Michael S. Tsirkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bingo!
The patch below fixes the two problems (listed above) with resume from
RAM that I have observed on my T60 with 2.6.21-rc5: with this patch
applied, and with CONFIG_NO_HZ unset, date advances correctly, X
functions properly and there
* Jens Axboe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But! I used hdparm -t solely, 2.6 was always ~5% faster than 2.4. But
using -Tt slowed down the hd speed by about 30%. So it looks like some
scheduler interaction, perhaps the memory timing loops gets it marked
as batch or something?
to check whether
22 matches
Mail list logo
