Re: [PATCH 7/8] Kconfig: silicon backplane dependency.

2007-04-21 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 22:45 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote: This is wrong. SSB does not depend on PCI or PCMCIA. SSB can (and does) stay very well on its own feet and can be the main system bus. Most Linksys WRT routers work that way. They have no PCI bus, but a SSB bus instead. Nevertheless,

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v4

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* mdew . [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any chance of supporting 2.6.20? okay, it seems it was less work to backport it to v2.6.20 than it was to answer all the where's the v2.6.20 version? emails ;-) You can download the v2.6.20.7 version of CFS from:

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] x86: use defined names for all CPU feature flags

2007-04-21 Thread Dave Jones
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 06:52:52PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote: --- 2.6.21-rc7-d390.orig/arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c +++ 2.6.21-rc7-d390/arch/x86_64/kernel/setup.c @@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ static void __cpuinit init_amd(struct cp /* Bit 31 in normal CPUID used for nonstandard 3DNow ID;

Re: [PATCH] dma_declare_coherent_memory wrong allocation

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:08:28 +0200 (CEST) Guennadi Liakhovetski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Either I've finally gone blind on this Friday 13th or... Looks like this almost 3 year old function has a bug. Patch below compile-tested... in a way. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi

Re: [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE

2007-04-21 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 07:52:44PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: It turns out that Nick's patch does not improve peak performance much, but it does prevent the decline when running with 16 threads on my quad core CPU! We _definately_ want both patches, there's a huge benefit in having them

Re: [PATCHv2] [KERNEL-DOC] kill warnings when building mandocs

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:19:32 +0200 Borislav Petkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +# get kernel version +sub get_kernel_version() { +my $version; +open (FILE, $ENV{SRCTREE}.Makefile) || die Can't open main kernel Makefile: $!; + +EOF: while (my $line = FILE) +{ + if ($line

Re: [RFC][PATCH] fix for async scsi scan sysfs problem (resend)

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:06:56 -0400 Josef Bacik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:02:36AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 09:25 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: Looking through everything I came to the conclusion that we don't really need the

Re: [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE

2007-04-21 Thread Hugh Dickins
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Rik van Riel wrote: Andrew Morton wrote: I do go on about that. But we're adding page flags at about one per year, and when we run out we're screwed - we'll need to grow the pageframe. If you want, I can take a look at folding this into the -mapping

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Williams
Peter Williams wrote: William Lee Irwin III wrote: William Lee Irwin III wrote: On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 10:23:07AM +1000, Peter Williams wrote: If some form of precise timer was used (instead) to trigger pre-emption then, where there is more than one task with the same expected on CPU time,

Re: [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE 2/2

2007-04-21 Thread Hugh Dickins
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote: Just for reference: the MADV_CURRENT behavior is to throw away data in the range. Not exactly. The Linux MADV_DONTNEED never throws away data from a PROT_WRITE,MAP_SHARED mapping (or shm) - it propagates the dirty bit, the page will eventually get

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Nick Piggin
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 04:47:27PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: Ingo Molnar wrote: ( Lets be cautious though: the jury is still out whether people actually like this more than the current approach. While CFS feedback looks promising after a whopping 3 days of it being released [ ;-) ],

[PATCH] sched: implement staircase scheduler yaf fix

2007-04-21 Thread Con Kolivas
While it annoys even me to keep posting fixes for SD, it is nice that fixing these bugs improves the behaviour further. This change causes noticeable improvements with loads that fork (ie make and friends). Thanks Al! Andrew please apply. --- Management of time_slice sharing across fork was

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Peter Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I retract this suggestion as it's a very bad idea. It introduces the possibility of starvation via the poor sods at the bottom of the queue having their on CPU forever postponed and we all know that even the smallest possibility of starvation

[patch] CFS scheduler, v4, for v2.6.20.7

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any chance of supporting 2.6.20? okay, it seems it was less work to backport it to v2.6.20 than it was to answer all the where's the v2.6.20 version? emails ;-) You can download the v2.6.20.7 version of CFS from:

Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:34 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +static bool permit_umount(struct vfsmount *mnt, int flags) +{ ... + return mnt-mnt_uid == current-uid; +} Yes, this seems very wrong. I'd have thought that comparing user_struct*'s would get us a heck of a

Re: [patch 1/8] add user mounts to the kernel

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:33 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add ownership information to mounts. A new mount flag, MS_SETUSER is used to make a mount owned by a user. If this flag is specified, then the owner will be set to the current

Re: [patch 7/8] allow unprivileged mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:39 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Define a new fs flag FS_SAFE, which denotes, that unprivileged mounting of this filesystem may not constitute a security problem. Since most filesystems haven't been designed with unprivileged mounting in mind, a

Re: [patch 8/8] allow unprivileged fuse mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:40 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Use FS_SAFE for fuse fs type, but not for fuseblk. FUSE was designed from the beginning to be safe for unprivileged users. This has also been verified in practice over many years. How does FUSE do this? There are

Re: [PATCH][RFC] i2c: adds support for i2c bus on 8xx

2007-04-21 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Vitaly, On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:27:14 +0400, Vitaly Bordug wrote: Utilized devicetree to store I2C data, ported i2c-algo-8xx.c from 2.4 approach(which remains nearly intact), refined i2c-rpx.c. I2C functionality has been validated on mpc885ads with EEPROM access. Thanks for working on this.

Re: [patch 3/8] account user mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:35 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Add sysctl variables for accounting and limiting the number of user mounts. The maximum number of user mounts is set to 1024 by default. This won't in itself enable user mounts, setting a mount to be owned by a

[ANNOUNCE] Staircase Deadline cpu scheduler version 0.44

2007-04-21 Thread Con Kolivas
A significant bugfix for forking tasks was just posted, so here is an updated version of the staircase deadline cpu scheduler. This may cause noticeable behavioural improvements under certain workloads (such as compiling software with make). Thanks to Al Boldi for making me check the fork code!

Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount

2007-04-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:34 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +static bool permit_umount(struct vfsmount *mnt, int flags) +{ ... + return mnt-mnt_uid == current-uid; +} Yes, this seems very wrong. I'd have thought that comparing user_struct*'s would

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Williams
Peter Williams wrote: Peter Williams wrote: Ingo Molnar wrote: your suggestion concentrates on the following scenario: if a task happens to schedule in an 'unlucky' way and happens to hit a busy period while there are many idle periods. Unless i misunderstood your suggestion, that is the

Re: [patch 1/8] add user mounts to the kernel

2007-04-21 Thread Miklos Szeredi
From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add ownership information to mounts. A new mount flag, MS_SETUSER is used to make a mount owned by a user. If this flag is specified, then the owner will be set to the current real user id and the mount will be marked with the MNT_USER flag.

Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount

2007-04-21 Thread Miklos Szeredi
+static bool permit_umount(struct vfsmount *mnt, int flags) +{ ... + return mnt-mnt_uid == current-uid; +} Yes, this seems very wrong. I'd have thought that comparing user_struct*'s would get us a heck of a lot closer to being able to support aliasing of UIDs between

Re: [patch 7/8] allow unprivileged mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:39 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Define a new fs flag FS_SAFE, which denotes, that unprivileged mounting of this filesystem may not constitute a security problem. Since most filesystems haven't been designed with unprivileged mounting in

Re: [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback

2007-04-21 Thread Ethan Solomita
Christoph Lameter wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Ethan Solomita wrote: cpuset_write_dirty_map.htm In __set_page_dirty_nobuffers() you always call cpuset_update_dirty_nodes() but in __set_page_dirty_buffers() you call it only if page-mapping is still set after locking. Is there a reason for

Re: [patch 8/8] allow unprivileged fuse mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Miklos Szeredi
Use FS_SAFE for fuse fs type, but not for fuseblk. FUSE was designed from the beginning to be safe for unprivileged users. This has also been verified in practice over many years. How does FUSE do this? There are obvious cases like crafting a filesystem which has setuid

Re: [PATCH 2/3] lumpy: increase pressure at the end of the inactive list

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:04:04 +0100 Andy Whitcroft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having selected an area at the end of the inactive list, reclaim is attempted for all LRU pages within that contiguous area. Currently, any pages in this area found to still be active or referenced are rotated back

Re: [patch 7/8] allow unprivileged mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Miklos Szeredi
Define a new fs flag FS_SAFE, which denotes, that unprivileged mounting of this filesystem may not constitute a security problem. Since most filesystems haven't been designed with unprivileged mounting in mind, a thorough audit is needed before setting this flag.

Re: [PATCH 3/3] introduce HIGH_ORDER delineating easily reclaimable orders

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:04:36 +0100 Andy Whitcroft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The memory allocator treats lower order (order = 3) and higher order (order = 4) allocations in slightly different ways. As lower orders are much more likely to be available and also more likely to be simply reclaimed

Re: [PATCH 3/3] introduce HIGH_ORDER delineating easily reclaimable orders

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:28:43 -0700 Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would have been better to have patched page_alloc.c independently, then to have used HIGH_ORDER in lumpy: increase pressure at the end of the inactive list. Actually that doesn't matter, because I plan on lumping

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread William Lee Irwin III
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:54:01AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: In practice they can starve a bit when one renices thousands of tasks, so i was thinking about the following special-case: to at least make them easily killable: if a nice 0 task sends a SIGKILL to a nice 19 task then we could

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All of my testing has been on desktop machines, although in most cases they were really loaded desktops which had load avg 10..100 from time to time, and none were low memory machines. Up to CFS v3 I thought nicksched was my winner, now CFSv3 looks

Re: Kaffeine problem with CFS

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead of that one, i tried CFSv3 and i cannot reproduce the hang anymore, Thanks!... And that explains why CFS-v3 on 21-rc7-git3 wouldn't show me the hang. As a matter of fact, nothing I did showed any bad behavior! Note that I was doing

Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:09:42 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +static bool permit_umount(struct vfsmount *mnt, int flags) +{ ... + return mnt-mnt_uid == current-uid; +} Yes, this seems very wrong. I'd have thought that comparing user_struct*'s would get

Re: [PATCH -mm] freezer: Document task_lock in thaw_process

2007-04-21 Thread Pavel Machek
On Sat 2007-04-21 00:23:19, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: From: Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] The task_lock() in include/linux/freezer.h:thaw_process() looks as though it were protecting p-flags, which is not the case. Add a comment that explains why it's there. Signed-off-by: Rafael J.

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* William Lee Irwin III [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suppose this is a special case of the dreaded priority inversion. What of, say, nice 19 tasks holding fs semaphores and/or mutexes that nice -19 tasks are waiting to acquire? Perhaps rt_mutex should be the default mutex implementation.

Re: [RFC PATCH(experimental) 2/2] Fix freezer-kthread_stop race

2007-04-21 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! Of course, running try_to_freeze() in kthread_stop() would be very wrong, so we'd actually need to do it in callers, preferably via a new kthread_stop_freezeable() wrapper. Well, even then we'll need to ensure that a thread would not call kthread_stop_freezeable() with any locks

Re: [2/2] 2.6.21-rc7: known regressions

2007-04-21 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, 21 April 2007 02:02, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: Dave Jones wrote: On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:16:54AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: Dave Jones wrote: Andi, I think. I've got his firstfloor.org patches applied to this kernel. Ah, I saw you patched in CFS

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Clean up x86 CPU feature setup

2007-04-21 Thread Andi Kleen
On Saturday 21 April 2007 00:49:48 Chuck Ebbert wrote: x86 CPU feature flag setup has become impossible to debug. Every user just does set_bit()/clear_bit() or writes the entire set to change the flags, so there's no way to trace how they're being set. Just use grep or printk? It is not

Re: Loud pop coming from hard drive on reboot

2007-04-21 Thread emisca
So, removing -d halt option solves this problem? 2007/4/20, Fabio Comolli [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Bingo! I switched from ata_piix.c to piix_ide.c and the pop disappeared. I must say that the pop also disappeared after suspending to disk using suspend2 (obviously without executing halt -n -h -p) .

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] x86: use defined names for all CPU feature flags

2007-04-21 Thread Andi Kleen
On Saturday 21 April 2007 00:52:52 Chuck Ebbert wrote: /* Bit 31 in normal CPUID used for nonstandard 3DNow ID;   3DNow is IDd by bit 31 in extended CPUID (1*32+31) anyway */ -   clear_bit(0*32+31, c-x86_capability); +   clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_PBE, c-x86_capability);   

Re: Permanent Kgdb integration into the kernel - lets get with it.

2007-04-21 Thread Andi Kleen
Lots of people want kgdb. One person is famously less keen on it, but we'll be able to talk him around, as long as the patches aren't daft. The big question is if the kgdb developers seriously want mainline. At least in the past this definitely wasn't the case. If they're not open to change

Re: Loud pop coming from hard drive on reboot

2007-04-21 Thread Fabio Comolli
Hi. On 4/21/07, emisca [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, removing -d halt option solves this problem? According to the halt manpage, -n implies -d (in other words, -d is not removed at all). Regards, Fabio - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a

Re: [PATCH v3] hpet: Detect hidden HPET on NVidia motherboards

2007-04-21 Thread Andi Kleen
a) there have been rather a lot of underlying changes in Andi's devel tree and b) we still haven't heard from Andy? c) my original review comments haven't been completely addressed. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to

Re: [PATCH 03/10] lib: dampen the percpu_counter FBC_BATCH

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:57 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the current logic the percpu_counter's accuracy delta is quadric wrt the number of cpus in the system, reduce this to O(n ln n). Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: [PATCH 04/10] lib: percpu_counter_mod64

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:58 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Add percpu_counter_mod64() to allow large modifications. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/linux/percpu_counter.h |9 + lib/percpu_counter.c | 28

Re: [PATCH 07/10] mm: count reclaimable pages per BDI

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:01 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Count per BDI reclaimable pages; nr_reclaimable = nr_dirty + nr_unstable. hm. Aggregating dirty and unstable at inc/dec time is a bit kludgy. If later on we want to know just dirty then we're in trouble. I can see the

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:04 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scale writeback cache per backing device, proportional to its writeout speed. By decoupling the BDI dirty thresholds a number of problems we currently have will go away, namely: - mutual interference starvation

Re: [PATCH 09/10] mm: expose BDI statistics in sysfs.

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:03 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Expose the per BDI stats in /sys/block/dev/queue/* Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- block/ll_rw_blk.c | 32 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) Index:

Re: [PATCH 08/10] mm: count writeback pages per BDI

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:02 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Count per BDI writeback pages. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/linux/backing-dev.h |1 + mm/page-writeback.c | 12 ++-- 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2

Re: [PATCH] utilities: add helper functions for safe 64-bit integer operations as 32-bit halves

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 20:55:49 -0400 (EDT) John Anthony Kazos Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +#define upper_32_bits(n) (sizeof(n) == 8 ? (u64)(n) 32 : 0) It's very unclear what type this returns, in terms of both size and signedness. Perhaps it always returns a u64, dunno. If it does, that will

Re: 2.6.20.7 locking up hard on boot

2007-04-21 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:34:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:30:59PM -0500, Marcos Pinto wrote: Yes, I just tried 2.6.20.3 with ACPI enabled and it booted perfectly. I'm hoping this means you know what's wrong? :-) Can you do a 'git bisect' on the versions between

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Williams
Ingo Molnar wrote: * Peter Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I retract this suggestion as it's a very bad idea. It introduces the possibility of starvation via the poor sods at the bottom of the queue having their on CPU forever postponed and we all know that even the smallest possibility

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The modified code is here : http://linux.1wt.eu/sched/orbitclock-0.2bench.tgz What is interesting to note is that it's easy to make X work a lot (99%) by using 0 as the sleeping time, and it's easy to make the process work a lot by using

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold

2007-04-21 Thread Miklos Szeredi
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:04 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scale writeback cache per backing device, proportional to its writeout speed. By decoupling the BDI dirty thresholds a number of problems we currently have will go away, namely: - mutual interference

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hacked it a bit to make it accept two parameters : -R run_time_in_microsecond : time spent burning CPU cycles at each round -S sleep_time_in_microsecond : time spent getting a rest It now advances what it thinks is a second at each iteration,

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It could become a useful scheduler benchmark ! i just tried ocbench-0.3, and it is indeed very nice! another thing i noticed: when using a -y larger then 1, then the window title (at least on Metacity) overlaps and thus the ocbench tasks have

Re: 2.6.20.7 locking up hard on boot

2007-04-21 Thread Marcos Pinto
It took me several hours, but I just got done combing things over with bisect as Greg requested. This is what git spit out as the problem patch in the end: 7639e962234c76031d1ddf436def7fd9602be560 is first bad commit commit 7639e962234c76031d1ddf436def7fd9602be560 Author: Jan Beulich [EMAIL

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold

2007-04-21 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:38:45 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The other deadlock, in throttle_vm_writeout() is still to be solved. Let's go back to the original changelog: Author: marcelo.tosatti marcelo.tosatti Date: Tue Mar 8 17:25:19 2005 + [PATCH] vm: pageout

Re: [PATCH 03/10] lib: dampen the percpu_counter FBC_BATCH

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 02:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:57 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the current logic the percpu_counter's accuracy delta is quadric wrt the number of cpus in the system, reduce this to O(n ln n). Signed-off-by: Peter

Re: [PATCH] dma_declare_coherent_memory wrong allocation

2007-04-21 Thread Guennadi Liakhovetski
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:08:28 +0200 (CEST) Guennadi Liakhovetski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Either I've finally gone blind on this Friday 13th or... Looks like this almost 3 year old function has a bug. Patch below compile-tested... in a

Re: [PATCH 04/10] lib: percpu_counter_mod64

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 02:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:58 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Add percpu_counter_mod64() to allow large modifications. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/linux/percpu_counter.h |9

Re: [PATCH 07/10] mm: count reclaimable pages per BDI

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 02:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:01 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Count per BDI reclaimable pages; nr_reclaimable = nr_dirty + nr_unstable. hm. Aggregating dirty and unstable at inc/dec time is a bit kludgy. If later on we

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ingo, I'm replying to your 3 mails at once. On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 12:45:22PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It could become a useful scheduler benchmark ! i just tried ocbench-0.3, and it is indeed very nice! So as you've noticed just one

Re: [PATCH 08/10] mm: count writeback pages per BDI

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 02:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:02 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Count per BDI writeback pages. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- include/linux/backing-dev.h |1 + mm/page-writeback.c |

Re: [PATCH 09/10] mm: expose BDI statistics in sysfs.

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 02:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:03 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Expose the per BDI stats in /sys/block/dev/queue/* Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- block/ll_rw_blk.c | 32

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Björn Steinbrink
Hi, On 2007.04.21 13:07:48 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: another thing i noticed: when using a -y larger then 1, then the window title (at least on Metacity) overlaps and thus the ocbench tasks have different X overhead and get scheduled a bit assymetrically as well. Is there any way to

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Björn, On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 01:29:41PM +0200, Björn Steinbrink wrote: Hi, On 2007.04.21 13:07:48 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: another thing i noticed: when using a -y larger then 1, then the window title (at least on Metacity) overlaps and thus the ocbench tasks have different

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 02:55 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:04 +0200 Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scale writeback cache per backing device, proportional to its writeout speed. By decoupling the BDI dirty thresholds a number of problems we currently

[REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44

2007-04-21 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Ingo, Hi Con, I promised to perform some tests on your code. I'm short in time right now, but I observed behaviours that should be commented on. 1) machine : dual athlon 1533 MHz, 1G RAM, kernel 2.6.21-rc7 + either scheduler Test: ./ocbench -R 25 -S 75 -x 8 -y 8 ocbench:

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: per device dirty threshold

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Zijlstra
+/* + * maximal error of a stat counter. + */ +static inline unsigned long bdi_stat_delta(void) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP + return NR_CPUS * FBC_BATCH; This is enormously wrong for CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1024 on a 2-way. Right, I knew about that but, uhm. I wanted to make that

Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, v3

2007-04-21 Thread Peter Williams
Peter Williams wrote: Ingo Molnar wrote: * Peter Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I retract this suggestion as it's a very bad idea. It introduces the possibility of starvation via the poor sods at the bottom of the queue having their on CPU forever postponed and we all know that even the

Re: other potentially deletable, dead stuff

2007-04-21 Thread Tilman Schmidt
Am 21.04.2007 01:19 schrieb Robert P. J. Day: [...] here's the short list of other stuff that is listed as on its way to being dead, based on the contents of Kconfig files. any of this stuff candidates for removal, if not scheduling for removal? [...] config ISDN_I4L tristate Old

Re: 2.6.20.7 locking up hard on boot

2007-04-21 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
On Saturday 21 April 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:34:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:30:59PM -0500, Marcos Pinto wrote: Yes, I just tried 2.6.20.3 with ACPI enabled and it booted perfectly. I'm hoping this means you know what's wrong? :-)

Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44

2007-04-21 Thread Con Kolivas
On Saturday 21 April 2007 22:12, Willy Tarreau wrote: Hi Ingo, Hi Con, I promised to perform some tests on your code. I'm short in time right now, but I observed behaviours that should be commented on. 1) machine : dual athlon 1533 MHz, 1G RAM, kernel 2.6.21-rc7 + either scheduler Test:

Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:09:42 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +static bool permit_umount(struct vfsmount *mnt, int flags) +{ ... +return mnt-mnt_uid == current-uid; +} Yes, this seems very wrong. I'd have

Re: [PATCH -mm] Taskstats fix the structure members alignment issue

2007-04-21 Thread Balbir Singh
Andrew Morton wrote: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:13:41 +0530 Balbir Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We broke the the alignment of members of taskstats to the 8 byte boundary with the CSA patches. In the current kernel, the taskstats structure is not suitable for use by 32 bit applications in a 64

[PATCH] Remove obsolete label from ISDN4Linux (v3)

2007-04-21 Thread Tilman Schmidt
From: Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] The obsolete label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and has never been, accurate. It has already prompted repeated attempts to remove actively used functionality from the kernel without a working replacement. This patch removes the incorrect label and

Re: [PATCH] utilities: add helper functions for safe 64-bit integer operations as 32-bit halves

2007-04-21 Thread John Anthony Kazos Jr.
From: John Anthony Kazos Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add helper functions upper_32_bits and lower_32_bits to include/linux/kernel.h to allow 64-bit integers to be separated into their 32-bit upper and lower halves without promoting integers, without stretching sign bits, and without generating

Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44

2007-04-21 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 10:40:18PM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: On Saturday 21 April 2007 22:12, Willy Tarreau wrote: Hi Ingo, Hi Con, I promised to perform some tests on your code. I'm short in time right now, but I observed behaviours that should be commented on. 1) machine : dual

Re: other potentially deletable, dead stuff

2007-04-21 Thread Robert P. J. Day
On Sat, 21 Apr 2007, Tilman Schmidt wrote: Am 21.04.2007 01:19 schrieb Robert P. J. Day: [...] here's the short list of other stuff that is listed as on its way to being dead, based on the contents of Kconfig files. any of this stuff candidates for removal, if not scheduling for removal?

[PATCH] RPC: add wrapper for svc_reserve to account for checksum

2007-04-21 Thread Jeff Layton
When the kernel calls svc_reserve to downsize the expected size of an RPC reply, it fails to account for the possibility of a checksum at the end of the packet. If a client mounts a NFSv2/3 with sec=krb5i/p, and does I/O then you'll generally see messages similar to this in the server's ring

Re: [patch 1/8] add user mounts to the kernel

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add ownership information to mounts. A new mount flag, MS_SETUSER is used to make a mount owned by a user. If this flag is specified, then the owner will be set to the current real user id and the mount will be

Re: Fwd: Fw: [2.6.20.4] BUG: dentry xattrs still in use in shrink_dcache_for_umount() with reiserfs

2007-04-21 Thread Andrea Righi
Jeff Mahoney wrote: I have the patchset that I mentioned, but I'm not proposing it for 2.6.21. It's much too invasive to be introduced in an -rc7, but it does include locking changes that I believe avoid this bug. Vladimir was right in his analysis that sometimes get_xa_root() takes the

Re: [d_path 3/7] Add d_namespace_path() to compute namespace relative pathnames

2007-04-21 Thread Tetsuo Handa
Hello. I've just returned from ELC2007 and I haven't read all posts in this thread yet, but I want to comment to this function. In AppArmor, we are interested in pathnames relative to the namespace root. This is the same as d_path() except for the root where the search ends. Add a function

Re: [patch 2/8] allow unprivileged umount

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] The owner doesn't need sysadmin capabilities to call umount(). Similar behavior as umount(8) on mounts having user=UID option in /etc/mtab. The difference is that umount also checks /etc/fstab, presumably to

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Bill Davidsen
Matt Mackall wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 08:37:11AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: [2] It's trivial to construct two or more perfectly reasonable and desirable definitions of fairness that are mutually incompatible. Probably not if you use common sense, and in the context of a replacement for

Re: other potentially deletable, dead stuff

2007-04-21 Thread Tilman Schmidt
Am 21.04.2007 15:11 schrieb Robert P. J. Day: On Sat, 21 Apr 2007, Tilman Schmidt wrote: [...] Removing isdn4linux would constitute a serious regression. i know. believe me, i *know that*, since i'm fairly sure it was my observation that initially started that discussion about isdn4linux.

Re: [patch 3/8] account user mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add sysctl variables for accounting and limiting the number of user mounts. The maximum number of user mounts is set to 1024 by default. This won't in itself enable user mounts, setting a mount to be owned by

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Bill Davidsen
Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Matt Mackall wrote: Why is X special? Because it does work on behalf of other processes? Lots of things do this. Perhaps a scheduler should focus entirely on the implicit and directed wakeup matrix and optimizing that instead[1]. I 100% agree - the

Re: [patch 4/8] propagate error values from clone_mnt

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Allow clone_mnt() to return errors other than ENOMEM. This will be used for returning a different error value when the number of user mounts goes over the limit. Fix copy_tree() to return EPERM for unbindable

Linux 2.6.20.7 - Hard Disk rumbling?

2007-04-21 Thread Sunil Naidu
Hello, I am facing a strange problems with an old 1.2 GHz P-III machine with a 10 GB disk (used as a dedicated web server, later retired out of service!). Out of interest to implement some wireless solution (experiment), I did compile 2.6.20.7 for my requirement. Strangely, I did observe:-

Re: [RFC][PATCH] fix for async scsi scan sysfs problem (resend)

2007-04-21 Thread Josef Bacik
On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 12:23:45AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:06:56 -0400 Josef Bacik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 10:02:36AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 09:25 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: Looking through everything I

Re: [patch 5/8] allow unprivileged bind mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Allow bind mounts to unprivileged users if the following conditions are met: - mountpoint is not a symlink or special file Why? This sounds like a left over from when we were checking permissions. -

Linux 2.6.21-rc7 - ACPI issues?

2007-04-21 Thread Sunil Naidu
Hello, I did compile 2.6.21-rc7 for a P-III machine. Here is the ACPI part in the dmesg:- ACPI Error (psargs-0355): [PRSE] Namespace lookup failure, AE_NOT_FOUND ACPI Error (psparse-0537): Method parse/execution failed [\_SB_.LNKE._PRS] (Node dfd63f40), AE_NOT_FOUND ACPI Exception

Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS]

2007-04-21 Thread Bill Davidsen
Ingo Molnar wrote: * Davide Libenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The same user nicing two different multi-threaded processes would expect a predictable CPU distribution too. [...] i disagree that the user 'would expect' this. Some users might. Others would say: 'my 10-thread rendering engine

Re: [patch 7/8] allow unprivileged mounts

2007-04-21 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:39 +0200 Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Define a new fs flag FS_SAFE, which denotes, that unprivileged mounting of this filesystem may not constitute a security problem. Since most filesystems haven't been designed

Kernel 2.6.20+ and rt2500/rt2570 problem

2007-04-21 Thread Wiktor Wandachowicz
Recently I tried newer releases of Linux distributions, specifically Sabayon Linux 3.3 and Ubuntu 7.04. Both suffer from problems with rt2500/rt2570 modules not being able to associate with access points. There are numerous problems reported Ubuntu Launchpad, Gentoo Forums and Sabayon Forums.

  1   2   3   4   5   >