On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, David Miller wrote:
From: Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:15:45 +0100
Any particular reason why this is done as a separate block device driver
rather than as SCSI?
Because no new fake SCSI drivers are accepted anymore.
Where did
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:31:06 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 08:23 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:05:57 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 20:08 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 22:59:49 +0200
On Jun 15 2007 13:39, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Linux maintainers will enforce \t being[1] 8, and will also enforce
the 80-column limit[2].
Heh. Actually, Linux maintainers have generally very consciously _avoided_
trying to enforce coding style
On Jun 16 2007 11:38, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Jun 15 2007 16:03, Christian Schmidt wrote:
Thanks for the clarification. I didn't use LVM on the device on purpose,
as root on LVM requires initrd (which I strongly dislike as
yet-another-point-of-failure). As
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
http://www.tglx.de/projects/hrtimers/2.6.22-rc4/patch-2.6.22-rc4-hrt10.patch
That suspends and resumes OK.
What was the bug?
A stupid state check, which prevented the PIT to be setup again. So the
box got stuck waiting for a
Following is my Server Hardware configuration
Intel Xeon Clovertown 5355
Intel 2U Server Case
TYAN S5382WAG2NRF Dual Socket 771 Motherboard
LSI Logic PCI-X SATA / SAS Controller 8 Port
Kingston 2 GB (2x 1G) 240 Pin FB-Dimm 667 Memory
Sabrent External USB Floppy Drive
Seagate Cheetah 15K RPM SAS
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 08:47 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
http://www.tglx.de/projects/hrtimers/2.6.22-rc4/patch-2.6.22-rc4-hrt10.patch
That suspends and resumes OK.
What was the bug?
A stupid state check, which
Hi!
I have a laptop Toshiba M45-S355 (with Intel Pentium M
Processor 750 - 1.86GHz) and trip points show me
hi-temperature (that is unsupported by this processor):
$ uname -a
Linux mandachuva 2.6.21.1 #1 PREEMPT Sun May 20 22:28:53
BRT 2007 i686 GNU/Linux
$ cat
Hi!
The question is: why not just extend SELinux to include AA functionality
rather than doing a whole new subsystem.
Because, as hard as it seems for some people to believe,
not everyone wants Type Enforcement. SELinux is a fine
implementation of type enforcement, but if you don't want
Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This 5 minute design undoubtedly has flaws but it shows a direction:
A basically standard 'De11' PC with some flash.
A Tivoised boot system so only signed kernels boot.
A modified kernel that only runs (FOSS) executables whose
On 6/13/07, Török Edvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
When I run a multithreaded application, consisting of a main thread
that is mostly idle, and
3 worker threads (using as much CPU as they can get), 'top' and 'ps'
show that
the application uses 0% CPU.
If I turn off thread details in top, and
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 08:53:33 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still I can not explain, why this resulted in this strange disappear in
the return instruction behavior.
I put up a fixed patch series against rc4-mm to:
On 5/19/07, Török Edvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried -v13. However the scheduling error is now 10% (vs 2% with -v12).
I also noticed strange behaviour with CPU hotplug. I offlined cpu1
(echo 0 /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online), and the typing speed on
my terminal decreased noticably. I
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Furthermore when you get source code of free software then there is
no meeting of minds needed for you to accept the GPL's conditions,
and only the letter of the license (and, in case of any ambiguities,
the intent of the author of the code)
Luca Tettamanti wrote:
Il Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 12:06:50PM +0300, Avi Kivity ha scritto:
After a bit of thinking: it's correct but removes an optimization;
furthermore it may miss other instructions that write to memory mapped
areas.
A more proper fix should be force the writeback if
David Brown wrote:
Yes thank you for the fix Avi. btw what version of kvm is in 2.6.22?
the kvm wiki doesn't say.
It's somewhere between kvm-21 and kvm-22. Any recent version of the
userspace can be used to drive it (i.e. starting with 2.6.22, there is
no need to match kernel and userspace
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
It would be possible to have a 'this is not initialised' flag on the
array, and if that is not set, always do a reconstruct-write rather
than a read-modify-write. But the first time you have an unclean
shutdown you are going to resync all the parity
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
I am not sure (would have to check again), but I believe both opensuse and
fedora (the latter of which uses LVM for all partitions by default) have
that working, while still using GRUB.
Keyword: partitions. I.e., they partition the hard drive (so that the first
31
David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How hard would it be to reprogramm the flash?
The flash contains hashes signed by the companies private key.
The kernel contains the public key. It can decrypt the hashes but the
private key isn't available to encrypt them. So although you can put a
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Greg KH wrote:
Usually you don't do that by doing a 'mv' otherwise you are almost
guaranteed stale and mixed up content for some period of time, not to
mention the issues surrounding paths that might be messed up.
on the contrary, useing 'mv' is by far the cleanest way
alan wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
This is one of those things that seems like a good idea, but frequently
ends up short. Part of the problem is that whenever you modify a file
is ill-defined, or rather, if you were to take the literal meaning of it
you'd end up with an
On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 15 June 2007 23:44:00 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 16, 2007, Tim Post [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:29 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Tivo has two choices: either it gives
users the content they want to
On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
because it could easily be argued that they linked the BIOS with the
Linux kernel
How so?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler
Chris Snook wrote:
The underlying internal implementation of something like this wouldn't
be all that hard on many filesystems, but it's the interface that's the
problem. The ':' character is a perfectly legal filename character, so
doing it that way would break things.
But to work without
On Jun 16, 2007, Scott Preece [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Scott Preece [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whether it's a legal requirement or a business decision, the result is
the same - neither forcing the manufacturer to make
This already exists -- it just not open sourced, and you could spend
years trying to create it. Trust me, once you start dealing with the
distributed issues with this, its gets very complex. I am not meaning
to discourage you, but there are patents already filed on this on
Linux.So you
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:22 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
For the architecture we use (Blackfin), it does not support unaligned
accesses, and we purposely never put in the trap/fixup code - we trap, and
printk(fix your source);
For the kernel you should fix up too in addition to the printk.
On Jun 16, 2007, Dmitry Torokhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then, any redistributor adds a copy of any version of the GPL (because
you didn't specify a version number). At this point, is the program
licensed by *you* only under this specific license?
If they did not make any changes then
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
This already exists -- it just not open sourced, and you could spend
years trying to create it. Trust me, once you start dealing with the
distributed issues with this, its gets very complex. I am not meaning
to discourage you, but there are patents already filed
Sanjoy Mahajan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, by making the COPYING contain the v2 text, is the author
specifying a particular version? If yes, then the sec. 9 provision
would be meaningless, since there would be no way to not specify a
version number.
Of course the published under terms of
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 07:42:50PM +0530, Nobin Mathew wrote:
I am trying to move my Game server from windows to Linux.
Is this a good idea?
How much better performance i will get?
Can i fine tune the 2.6.20 kernel to get better performance?
What all areas i can do this fine tuning?
On 6/15/07, Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Albert Cahalan]
It's really not worth getting bothered by. Truth is, big
giant
pathnames break lots of stuff already, both kernel and
userspace.
Just look in /proc for some nice juicy kernel breakage:
cwd, exe, fd/*, maps, mounts,
Sujet : airo suspend problem
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
the airo driver (drivers/net/wireless/airo.c) does in its suspend routine [1].
But not all the pci cards support power management and cause
pci_enable_wake/pci_set_power_state to return errors.
On pci card that don't support PM,
John Blackwood wrote:
By default all signals are ptraced as before. However, a debugger
may now modify the set of per-task ptraced signals, where only the
signals in this ptrace signal mask will be ptraced.
I must admit, I agree with Roland...
+void ptrace_update_traced_signals(struct
===
Code: 10 89 5c 24 10 89 c3 89 7c 24 18 89 d7 89 74 24 14 8b 70 28 75 1a
8b
4e 08 89 fa 89 d8 ff 51 18 8b 5c 24 10 83 74 24 14 8b 7c 24 18 83 c4 1c
c3
89 74 24 0c 8b 40 10 8b 40 24 8b 40 10 8b 40 08 EIP: [f0a93c94]
rpcauth_checkverf+0x34/0x70 [sunrpc] SS:ESP
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 11:31 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Hopefully, this patch improves the situation, it introduces two
new types, compat_u64 and compat_s64. These are defined on all
architectures to have the same size and alignment as the 32 bit
version of u64 and s64.
Will GCC know that it
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:24:08AM -0300, Tomas Neme wrote:
1) What is tat?
2) How can I get some?
3) Where do I go to trade it in?
4) is it legal to consume it in my country?
5) should I have a designed driver when I do?
6) Is that allowed to be a binary-only driver or
does it have
Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How hard would it be to reprogramm the flash?
The flash contains hashes signed by the companies private key.
The kernel contains the public key. It can decrypt the hashes but the
private key isn't available to encrypt them. So
From: Udo A. Steinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The chipset doc for IHC4 tells us:
1.In general, software should not attempt any non-posted accesses during
arbiter disable except to the ICH4's power management registers. This implies
that interrupt handlers for any unmasked hardware interrupts and
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/clockchips.h |4
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm/include/linux/clockchips.h
===
---
The following patch series contains:
- dyntick bugfixes for -mm (caused by the cpuidle changes in ACPI)
- updates and improvements to high resolution timer / dynticks
- high resolution timer / dynticks support for x86_64
The x86_64 support is based on an initial patch from Chris Wright.
clocksource_adjust() has a clock argument, which shadows the file
global clock variable. Fix this up.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/time/timekeeping.c |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index:
The cpuidle patches moved the tick nohz handling from irq_exit into
the inner idle loop. The change is correct as it covers non interrupt
based wakeups (e.g DMA) on x86 as well, but the move breaks ARM, SH
and SPARC64.
Keep the original implementation and deselet the irq exit code for
those
From: john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
After discussing w/ Thomas over IRC, it seems the issue is the sched
tick fires on every cpu at the same time, causing extra lock contention.
This smaller change, adds an extra offset per cpu so the ticks don't
line up. This patch also drops the idle latency
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/timer.c | 24
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm/kernel/timer.c
===
---
We need to make sure, that the clockevent devices are resumed, before
the tick is resumed. The current resume logic does not guarantee this.
Add CLOCK_EVT_MODE_RESUME and call the set mode functions of the clock
event devices before resuming the tick / oneshot functionality.
Fixup the existing
The patch is necessary on one of my boxen, where programming the stop
sequence twice leads to PIT malfunction.
Sigh !
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/i386/kernel/i8253.c |9 ++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Index:
When a device is replaced by a better rated device, then the broadcast
mode needs to be evaluated again. When the new device has no requirement
for broadcasting, then the broadcast bits for the CPU must be cleared.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
From: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Add some more debug information to the hrtimer and clock events code.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/i386/kernel/apic.c|3 +++
kernel/hrtimer.c |5 -
Replace the pcspkr private PIT lock by the global PIT lock to
serialize the PIT access all over the place.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c |2 ++
drivers/input/misc/pcspkr.c | 11 ---
include/asm-x86_64/i8253.h |6 ++
3
From: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I fixed this in x86_64. Looks like the kind of thing that will break
voyager on i386.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/i386/kernel/hpet.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1
i386 and sparc64 have the identical code to update the cmos clock.
Move it into kernel/time/ntp.c as there are other architectures
coming along with the same requirements.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
From: Tony Breeds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm working on a clocksource implementation for all powerpc platforms.
some of these platforms needs to do a little work as part of the
settimeofday() syscall and I can't see a way to do that without adding
this hook to clocksource.
From: Tony Breeds [EMAIL
From: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When making changes to x86_64 timers, I noticed that touching
hpet.h triggered an unreasonably large rebuild. Untangling
it from timex.h quiets the extra rebuild quite a bit.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
From: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Speedup hrtimer_enqueue by evaluating the rbtree insertion result.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
kernel/hrtimer.c | 10 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Index:
Use the generic cmos update function in kernel/time/ntp.c
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/x86_64/Kconfig |4
arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c | 25
setup_pit_timer is declared in asm-i386/timer.h. Move it to the
pit header file, so it can be used by x86_64 as well.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/asm-i386/i8253.h |2 ++
include/asm-i386/timer.h |1 -
2 files changed, 2
Remove unused code and variables and do some codingstyle / whitespace
cleanups while at it.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/x86_64/kernel/tsc.c | 41 +++--
1 file
From: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lost when merged with i386. Happy to drop, but I suspect Andi would
rather not break existing users (I noticed because it was part of my
testing). If dropped, Documentation needs updating.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas
From [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems the hpet clocksource's vread method was lost in the x86_64 conversion
to clockevents. So here it is.
Signed-off-by: Sébastien Dugué [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
arch/i386/kernel/hpet.c | 10 ++
1 file changed, 10
From: Venki Pallipadi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disable irq balancing on IRQ0.
Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Add tick_nohz_{stop,restart}_sched_tick to idle
loop in prepartion for turning on dynticks. These
are just noops until NO_HZ is enabled in next patch.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi
From: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Everything is in place, enable the HIGHRES andf NO_HZ config options.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/x86_64/Kconfig
On Saturday 16 June 2007, David Woodhouse wrote:
Will GCC know that it needs to emit code to handle that (mis)alignment?
I've tested this with gcc-4.0.3, and it does the right thing, which
is to split a 4 byte aligned 64 bit load/store into two 32 bit accesses,
if you pass -mstrict-align.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:22:21AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
because it could easily be argued that they linked the BIOS with the
Linux kernel
How so?
(I'm going to refer to Linux as GPLix from here on since this argument
is
* Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've got some more info about this bug. It is gathered with
nmi_watchdog=2 and a modified nmi_watchdog_tick(), which instead of
calling die_nmi() just prints a line and calls show_registers().
great!
The pattern that emerges is that on CPU0 we
Linus, please pull from the for-linus branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ieee1394/linux1394-2.6.git
for-linus
to receive the following updates to the old and the new IEEE 1394 subsystem:
drivers/firewire/fw-ohci.c |2 +-
drivers/ieee1394/eth1394.c | 21
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:01:14PM -0700, alan wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Kok, Auke wrote:
snip
have you looked into ext3cow? it allows you to take snapshots of the
entire ext3 fs at a single point, and rollback / extract snapshots at any
time later. This may be sufficient for you
On Saturday 16 June 2007, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Saturday 16 June 2007, David Woodhouse wrote:
Will GCC know that it needs to emit code to handle that (mis)alignment?
I've tested this with gcc-4.0.3, and it does the right thing, which
is to split a 4 byte aligned 64 bit load/store into two
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What this means for the FSF goals if Tivo get up one morning and switch
their system firmware to ROM however is interesting 8)
I'm not the FSF, and I don't speak for it, but it seems to me that
this would be mission
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 13:21 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Saturday 16 June 2007, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Saturday 16 June 2007, David Woodhouse wrote:
Will GCC know that it needs to emit code to handle that (mis)alignment?
I've tested this with gcc-4.0.3, and it does the right thing,
Hi;
16 Haz 2007 Cts tarihinde, Dave Jones şunları yazmıştı:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:33:41AM +0300, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
One of our colleagues found following problem with his old laptop while
testing Linus's latest git with external alsa-driver (v1.0.14). And we
can also reproduce
Le vendredi 15 juin 2007 à 23:08 +0200, Jiri Slaby a écrit :
Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Sáb, 2007-06-02 às 11:00 +0200, Thierry Merle escreveu:
Mauro Carvalho Chehab a écrit :
This seems to be an interesting approach.
Interesting but impossible to do
On Sat, June 16, 2007 05:34, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Friday 15 June 2007 22:04, Indan Zupancic wrote:
On Fri, June 15, 2007 07:41, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
/*
+ * Schedule switch for execution. We need to throttle requests,
+ * otherwise keyboard may become unresponsive.
+ */
+static
Ingo Molnar wrote:
and that's where the GPLv3 errs: it arbitrarily attempts to define
some work that can _easily_ be completely separate from the GPL-ed
work to be under the scope of source code.
Well thanksfuly the last draft doesn't and puts keys and other such
stuff under installation
Thierry Merle napsal(a):
Le vendredi 15 juin 2007 à 23:08 +0200, Jiri Slaby a écrit :
Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Sáb, 2007-06-02 às 11:00 +0200, Thierry Merle escreveu:
Nevertheless, I will start to specify the framework.
The helper daemon would link to the v4l2-apps/lib.
Ok, thanks!
Jeffrey V. Merkey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This already exists -- it just not open sourced, and you could spend
years trying to create it. Trust me, once you start dealing with the
distributed issues with this, its gets very complex. I am not meaning
to discourage you, but there are
Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[...]
This means going through every single point in the regression list
asking Have we tried everything possible to solve this regression?.
[...]
And a low hanging fruit to improve the release would be if you
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Jun 15 2007 13:21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
|
| from CodingStyle:
| Tabs are 8 characters,
[...]
I did indeed write that.
Tabs are 8 characters in the kernel coding style.
That clarification (in the kernel coding
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Jun 15 2007 13:39, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Linux maintainers will enforce \t being[1] 8, and will also enforce
the 80-column limit[2].
Heh. Actually, Linux maintainers have generally very consciously _avoided_
trying to
Daniel Hazelton wrote:
I always did imply a within reason. To me that means if it is
simple for them to do it and can be simply extended to me as well
then they have to extend it. Handing out a SHA1 key definitely is
simple and thus IMO something I can expect them to do.
But the within
Hi Stefan,
On 16/06/07, Stefan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
Well, if _other_ subsystems would get regressions in Linus' tree fixed
quicker, there might perhaps be more people who would consider to run
-rc kernels and would catch and report my regressions.
[..]
[Adrian, I'm not
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 23:18:04 +0400 Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
Actually it would be perfect to get strict rules also for math. and log.
operators being splitted on several lines:
I disagree that CodingStyle should contain such strict rules for
line continuations.
People seem
Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
There sould be someting making strict rule over alignment (as it done
for the tabs size).
That's impracticable. Alignment, as it serves readability, cannot be
covered by a few strict rules.
--
Stefan Richter
-=-=-=== -==- =
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To
I read it: the flash contains everything from the bootloader to the
kernel and file system. The bootloader contains the public key and
checks if the kernel/fs
are ok. That includes calculating hashes and checking signatures.
No encryption/decryption there at all.
Right?
Then how hard
malc wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:
malc wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[..snip..]
Now integral load matches the one obtained via the accurate method.
However the report for individual cores are of by around 20% percent.
I think I missed some of
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 07:03:44AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
...
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:55:16AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
For example you feel, that you've
Neil Brown wrote:
On Friday June 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I understand the way
raid works, when you write a block to the array, it will have to read all
the other blocks in the stripe and recalculate the parity and write it out.
Your
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
I want to test several configurations, from a 45 disk raid6 to a 45 disk
raid0. at 2-3 days per test (or longer, depending on the tests) this
becomes a very slow process.
Are you suggesting the code that is written to enhance
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 12:34:11PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
You're right. My question was probably not relevant -- all these 64-bit
architectures cope with misaligned loads anyway. If we ever have to deal
with 32-bit compat on a 64-bit architecture which can't handle
misalignment, I'm
Krzysztof Halasa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, by making the COPYING contain the v2 text, is the author
specifying a particular version? If yes, then the sec. 9 provision
would be meaningless, since there would be no way to not specify a
version number.
Of course the published under
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:28:13AM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
That's not actually the right image. There's a graph of commits with a lot
of splitting and joining lines. Each branch and each tag sits something in
this web. The difference between branches and tags is that you're expected
I reviewed your sample implementation, and it appears to infringe 3
patents already.You should do some research on this.
Are you able to tell us which areas of the code infringe existing patents?
Cheers,
Mark
--
Dave: Just a question. What use is a unicyle with no seat? And no
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:
malc wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Balbir Singh wrote:
malc wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[..snip..]
Now integral load matches the one obtained via the accurate method.
However the report for individual cores are of by around 20%
Neil Brown wrote:
On Friday June 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I understand the way
raid works, when you write a block to the array, it will have to read all
the other blocks in the stripe and recalculate the parity and write it out.
Hey,
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:16:08AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
so which one is preferred for the kernel?
err = very_long_function_name(lots_of_arguments,
less,
less,
less,
[Stefan Richter - Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:07:43PM +0200]
| Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| There sould be someting making strict rule over alignment (as it done
| for the tabs size).
|
| That's impracticable. Alignment, as it serves readability, cannot be
| covered by a few strict rules.
| --
|
On Saturday 16 June 2007 11:36:00 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
The -hrt tree at http://www.tglx.de/projects/hrtimers/2.6.22-rc4/ contains
also an hpet force patch series from Venki Pallipadi, but I leave this up
to Venki to send it mainline wards.
What's the status on the nForce hpet force fix
On Saturday 16 June 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
+#if defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ) !defined(CONFIG_NONIRQ_WAKEUP)
+ /* Make sure that timer wheel updates are propagated */
+ if (!in_interrupt() idle_cpu(smp_processor_id()) !need_resched())
+ tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick();a
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 16:36 +0200, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
On Saturday 16 June 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
+#if defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ) !defined(CONFIG_NONIRQ_WAKEUP)
+ /* Make sure that timer wheel updates are propagated */
+ if (!in_interrupt() idle_cpu(smp_processor_id())
1 - 100 of 454 matches
Mail list logo
