-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Andy Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch dfe6e81deaa79c85086c0cc8d85b229e444ab97f in mainline.
ieee80211_get_radiotap_len() tries to dereference radiotap length without
taking care that it is
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch b331615722779b078822988843ddffd4eaec9f83 in mainline.
In STA mode, the AP will echo our traffic. This includes multicast
traffic.
Receiving these
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.23.X release.
There are 23 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
let us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and
wants to add a
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: H. Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch e6e1ace9904b72478f0c5a5aa7bd174cb6f62561 in mainline.
We use signed values for limit checking since the values can go
negative under certain circumstances.
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Dave Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch edaf420fdc122e7a42326fe39274c8b8c9b19d41 in mainline.
I ran into this problem on a system that was unable to obtain NTP sync
because the clock was running
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reverted upstream by commit 6a22c57b8d2a62dea7280a6b2ac807a539ef0716
Revert this commit:
commit 2e1c49db4c640b35df13889b86b9d62215ade4b6
Author:
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 9a24d04a3c26c223f22493492c5c9085b8773d4a upstream
While we were reviewing pageattr_32/64.c for unification,
Thomas Gleixner noticed the following serious SMP
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: H. Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 6b6815c6d5d1dc209701d1661a7a0e09a295db2f in mainline.
Apparently some specific versions of LILO enter the kernel with a
stack pointer that doesn't match the
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch e3d2697669abbe26c08dc9b95e2a71c634d096ed in mainline.
The kernel's copy of struct vcpu_register_vcpu_info was out of date,
at best causing the
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch ace2e92e193126711cb3a83a3752b2c5b8396950 in mainline.
XFS leaves stray mappings around when it vmaps memory to make it
virtually contigious. This
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Lepton Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
commit a24864a1d52a97e345a6bd4862a057f98364d098
uml: definitively kill subprocesses on panic
In a stock 2.6.22.6 kernel, poweroff a user mode linux guest (2.6.22.6
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 91e0c5f3dad47838cb2ecc1865ce789a0b7182b1 in mainline.
This adds a mechanism to register a callback function to be called once
a batch of hypercalls has
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 9f79991d4186089e228274196413572cc000143b in mainline.
When a pagetable is no longer in use, it must be unpinned so that its
pages can be freed.
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
commit 818f6ef407b448cef63294b9d0f6f8a2af9cb817 in mainline.
uml: fix an IPV6 libc vs kernel symbol clash
On some systems, with IPV6 configured, there is a clash
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
commit 189872f968def833727b6bfef83ebd7440c538e6 in mainline.
uml: don't use glibc asm/user.h
Stop including asm/user.h from libc - it seems to be disappearing from
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch db220b234da9f183b127b9c3077c253b94756e35 in mainline.
pci_device_to_OF_node() returns the device node attached to a PCI device,
but doesn't actually grab
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
commit 71f926f2ea61994470a53c9e11d3ef993197cada in mainline.
uml: stop using libc asm/page.h
Remove includes of asm/page.h from libc code. This header seems to be
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Ralf Baechle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 572afc248c33c902760f6f24a72c180f0e4f1719 in mainline.
Tested with Malta; inflates malta_defconfig by 3932 bytes. Ideally there
should be additional
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch ba02946a903015840ef672ccc9dc8620a7e83de6 in mainline
Its legal for the stfiwx instruction to have RA = 0 as part of its
effective address calculation. This is
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch d58aa8c7b1cc0add7b03e26bdb8988d98d2f4cd1 in mainline.
From: Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:36:14 -0700
Subject: [patch 02/19]
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Ralf Baechle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch a76ab5c10d99bdf458067cb495e72c0ee5f09909 in mainline.
When GDB writes a breakpoint into address area of inferior process the
kernel needs to invalidate the
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch d060db63fd38a8a75f666576efc28cdc31cf in mainline.
[SPARC64]: Fix register usage in xor_raid_4().
Some typos led to using %i6/%i7 instead of %l6/%l7 in
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.23.X release.
There are 19 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
let us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and
wants to add a
On 15-11-07 00:23, David Miller wrote:
From: Takashi Iwai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
BTW, I also prefer keeping the name [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's been so.
That's fine with me, I've changed it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Great, thanks. Jaroslav -- given that this list won't need moderation I'd
consider it
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
sched: keep utime/stime monotonic
cpustats use utime/stime as a ratio against sum_exec_runtime, as a
consequence it can happen - when the ratio changes faster than
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 487e9bf25cbae11b131d6a14bdbb3a6a77380837 in mainline.
It's possible to provoke unionfs (not yet in mainline, though in mm and
some distros) to hit
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 6eca9004dfcb274a502438a591df5b197690afb1 in mainline.
For the locking to work, only the tag map and tag bit map may be shared
(incidentally, I was just
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch a115d5caca1a2905ba7a32b408a6042b20179aaa in mainline.
this Xen related commit:
commit 966812dc98e6a7fcdf759cbfa0efab77500a8868
Author: Jeremy
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[FUTEX]: Fix address computation in compat code.
[ Upstream commit: 3c5fd9c77d609b51c0bab682c9d40cbb496ec6f1 ]
compat_exit_robust_list() computes a pointer to the
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch e423003028183df54f039dfda8b58c49e78c89d7 in mainline.
This is a writeback-internal marker but we're propagating it all the way back
to userspace!.
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 6866bef40d06f7c2baac3a855b1917a8ca75456c in mainline.
The out label should not include the unmap, the only way to jump
there already has unmapped the source.
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Tsugikazu Shibata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 3b6662f192fc521b9657f63e68d20ec99979dae6 upstream.
Here is another sync patch of Documentation/ja_JP/HOWTO
Japanese developer sent me some cosmetic
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 05aa345034de6ae9c77fb93f6a796013641d57d5 in mainline.
SLUB: Fix memory leak by not reusing cpu_slab
Fix the memory leak that may occur when we attempt
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: J. Bruce Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 97855b49b6bac0bd25f16b017883634d13591d00 in mainline.
It's currently possible to send posix_locks_deadlock() into an infinite
loop (under the BKL).
For
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
patch 3aa416b07f0adf01c090baab26fb70c35ec17623 in mainline.
It is possible for the current->curr_chain_key to become inconsistent
with the current index if the
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.23.X release.
There are 13 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
let us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and
wants to add a
On 15-11-07 05:16, Bron Gondwana wrote:
Totally unrelated - I sent something to the kolab mailing list a couple
[ ... ]
I'm sure if I had something that I considered worth informing the ALSA
project of, I'd be wary of spending the same effort writing a good post
knowing it may be dropped in
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:58:15PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 November 2007 12:54:44 Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:51:50PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > Building with the attached .config on x86-64, it does this:
> > >
> > > CC arch/um/kernel/smp.o
> > >
Ok, I've been slacking on the -stable front for a bit here, and didn't
realize how far behind I've gotten. Everyone has been sending patches
in, which is great, but now we are facing a HUGE 114 patch release.
As there's no real way that everyone can review all of these patches,
I've decided to
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 12:54:44 Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:51:50PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > Building with the attached .config on x86-64, it does this:
> >
> > CC arch/um/kernel/smp.o
> > In file included from include/asm/arch/tlb.h:11,
> > from
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> So even at 100% dirty limits, it won't let you dirty more than 1GB on the
> default 32-bit setup.
Side note: all of these are obviously still just heuristics. If you really
*do* run on a 32-bit kernel, and you want to have the pain, I'm sure you
* Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thursday 15 November 2007 15:06:10 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > A stop_machine (or lightweight variant using IPI) would be sufficient and
> > > vastly simpler. Trying to patch NMI handlers while
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 01:29:19PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> Fixes for memory hotplug compile and .section handling.
>
> This patch fixes following bugs
> ==
> WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x1d07c): Section mismatch: reference to .init.text:f
> ind_e820_area (between 'init_memory_mapping' and
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
> So we've already been running those settings for a while. They didn't
> help.
Ok, so something else is up. If the mmap file is 2G, and you have 6G of
RAM, you shouldn't be hitting the dirty limits with those setups.
Of course, it may still be
> I found patch from about three years ago that implemented a 32-bit
> version of the x86_64 machine check handler. Do you know of any newer
> attempts?
No.
> However, given the merge of x86, a single implementation should be able
> to handle both the 32-bit and 64-bit cases. I tried to build
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 08:24:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> >
> > And congratulations to him for that. We almost entirely dropped 2.6.16,
> > but there's a regression some time since then that makes large MMAPed
> > files a major pain
On Tuesday November 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> raid5-fix-unending-write-sequence.patch is in -mm and I believe is
> waiting on an Acked-by from Neil?
>
It seems to have just been sent on to Linus, so it probably will go in
without:
Acked-By: NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> dean gaudet writes:
>
> > actually multiplexing is the main feature i am in need of. there are an
> > insufficient number of counters (even on k8 with 4 counters) to do
> > complete stall accounting or to get a general overview of L1d/L1i/L2 cache
dean gaudet writes:
> actually multiplexing is the main feature i am in need of. there are an
> insufficient number of counters (even on k8 with 4 counters) to do
> complete stall accounting or to get a general overview of L1d/L1i/L2 cache
> hit rates, average miss latency, time spent in
On Thursday 15 November 2007 15:06:10 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > A stop_machine (or lightweight variant using IPI) would be sufficient and
> > vastly simpler. Trying to patch NMI handlers while they're running is
> > already crazy.
>
> I wouldn't
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:56:01PM +0100, Christian Kujau wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> There are a number of process things we _could_ do. Like
>> - have bugfix-only kernel releases
>
> Adrian Bunk does (did?) this with 2.6.16.x, although it always seemed to me
> like an
Fixes for memory hotplug compile and .section handling.
This patch fixes following bugs
==
WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x1d07c): Section mismatch: reference to .init.text:f
ind_e820_area (between 'init_memory_mapping' and 'arch_add_memory')
WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x946b5): Section mismatch:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
> And congratulations to him for that. We almost entirely dropped 2.6.16,
> but there's a regression some time since then that makes large MMAPed
> files a major pain (specifically the dcc database clean takes about 5
> minutes on 2.6.16 and about 12
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Later a syscall might be needed with event multiplexing, but that seems
> more like a far away non essential feature.
actually multiplexing is the main feature i am in need of. there are an
insufficient number of counters (even on k8 with 4 counters) to
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:46:24PM +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 14-11-07 11:07, David Miller wrote:
>
> Added Jaroslav and Takashi to the already extensive CC
>
>> From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>> So, when are you creating a replacement alsa-devel mailing list on
>>> vger?
Robert Hancock wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Robert Hancock wrote:
>>> This fixes some problems with ATAPI devices on nForce4 controllers in
>>> ADMA mode
>>> on systems with memory located above 4GB. We need to delay setting
>>> the 64-bit
>>> DMA mask until the PRD table and padding buffer are
Tejun Heo wrote:
Robert Hancock wrote:
This fixes some problems with ATAPI devices on nForce4 controllers in ADMA mode
on systems with memory located above 4GB. We need to delay setting the 64-bit
DMA mask until the PRD table and padding buffer are allocated so that they don't
get allocated
Rusty Russell wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Was looking through libata, and it seems to me that ata_sg_setup is a
> superset of ata_sg_setup_one. Am I missing something? Seems like it could
> be simplified.
>
> My machine never seems to do an ata_sg_setup_one, so this patch isn't really
>
* Rusty Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 November 2007 05:58:05 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > x86 optimization of the immediate values which uses a movl with code
> > patching to set/unset the value used to populate the register used as
> > variable source.
>
> For the record,
I suppose this can be better analyzed if the cpp output is presented to
show exactly how rdlck/wrlck is included/defined .
But the only requirement is that the flags are unique. solong as wrlck
!= rdlck != unlck every is happy.
There is no expectation that an i386 binary will run on an alpha
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 09:08, Jesper Nilsson wrote:
> Scrap the local __INLINE__ macro, and rename timeval_cmp to fasttime_cmp.
>
> Inline macro was completely unnecessary since the macro was defined
> locally to be inline.
> timeval_cmp was inaccurately named since it does comparison on
>
Gabriel C wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With newer kernels HDD in my old laptop is limited to UDMA 33.
> With this patch I get UDMA 100 again.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Craciunescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
applied to #tj-upstream-fixes with Hi, edited out. :-)
--
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Nov 15, 2007 10:38 AM, Kay Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 09:01 +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > On Nov 15, 2007 5:27 AM, Kay Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 20:19 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Kay Sievers wrote:
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 05:58:05 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> x86 optimization of the immediate values which uses a movl with code
> patching to set/unset the value used to populate the register used as
> variable source.
For the record, I think the patching code gross overkill.
A
On Tuesday November 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2007 07:08, Mark Lord 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
> > >
On Wednesday November 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 09:38:20AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > so please stop this "too busy and too noisy" nonsense already. It was
> > > nonsense 10 years ago and it's nonsense
On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 09:01 +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> On Nov 15, 2007 5:27 AM, Kay Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 20:19 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could it be an init-order problem, where something tries to
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 23:39:31 Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Hi Jens,
> >
> > As you asked for some time ago. Of course, it turns out that the
> > eject command ignores the error anyway, but it's nice that it now errors.
> >
> > Not entirely
David Miller writes:
> From: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 12:11:10 +1100
>
> > The third (hard to extend cleanly) is a good point, and is a valid
> > criticism of the current set of perfmon2 system calls, I think.
> > However, the goal of being able to extend the
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
I fear you are the one who is in charge to get mips working again :)
But as always, there are bad news and good news: As far as I heard
last week John Cooper is looking into this as well.
I'm not actively working on it but AFAIK I may have been
the last one to touch it
Mark Lord wrote:
> Sebastian Kemper reported that issuing CD/DVD commands under libata
> is not fully compatible with ide-scsi. In particular, the
> GPCMD_SET_STREAMING
> was being rejected at the host level in some instances.
>
> The reason is that libata-scsi insists upon the cmd_len field
On Thursday 15 November 2007 12:11, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 05:03:25PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Well this is likely the result of the SLUB regression. If you allocate an
> > order 1 page then the zone locks need to be taken. SLAB queues the a
Yeah, it appears this
Tejun Heo wrote:
> If so, can you please add that switching into register mode is okay as
> long as there's no other ADMA commands in flight and add
> WARN_ON((qc->flags & ATA_QCFLAG_RESULT_TF) && link->sactive)?
More accurately, link->sactive test can be substituted with
(ap->qc_allocated & ~(1
Hello,
Robert Hancock wrote:
> We need to run any DMA command with result taskfile requested in ADMA mode
> when the port is in ADMA mode, otherwise it may try to use the legacy DMA
> engine
> in ADMA mode which is not allowed. Enforce this with BUG_ON() since data
> corruption could potentially
Robert Hancock wrote:
> This fixes some problems with ATAPI devices on nForce4 controllers in ADMA
> mode
> on systems with memory located above 4GB. We need to delay setting the 64-bit
> DMA mask until the PRD table and padding buffer are allocated so that they
> don't
> get allocated above 4GB
From: Russell Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:21:04 -0500
> > At the risk of being egocentric, the cyclic subsystem (which is
> > executed at least 100 times per second on every Solaris system)
> > had its last substantial fix over six years ago, and its last fix
> > of any
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Tim Bird wrote:
> > I'm just about to release 2.6.24-rc2-rt1 and I'm sure mips as well as
> > powrepc is badly broken. Any help in getting these back up and working
> > would be greatly appreciated.
>
> I'll probably have some pretty basic questions.
> If you don't mind an
From: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 12:11:10 +1100
> The third (hard to extend cleanly) is a good point, and is a valid
> criticism of the current set of perfmon2 system calls, I think.
> However, the goal of being able to extend the interface tends to be in
>
Bryan Cantrill of Sun (ala DTrace) has a notion of perfect code:
http://blogs.sun.com/bmc/entry/on_i_dreaming_in_code
He also has some examples (from bottom comment section of above):
Can you list a small number of examples of "software perfection"?
Posted by Russell Leighton on
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Looks like that may be just an artifact from older days.
>
> I'll do some more tests, and it it truely is, I'll go and remove the added
> headers.
Thanks.
> I'm just about to release 2.6.24-rc2-rt1 and I'm sure mips as well as
> powrepc is badly broken. Any help in
Correct potentially unstable PC RTC time register reading in time_64.c
Stop the use of an incorrect technique for reading the standard PC RTC
timer, which is documented to "disconnect" time registers from the bus
while updates are in progress. The use of UIP flag while interrupts
are disabled
Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 08:45:28AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:56:20 -0700 Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> > David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > > From: Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > > Date: Tue, 13
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 05:03:25PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> Well this is likely the result of the SLUB regression. If you allocate an
> order 1 page then the zone locks need to be taken. SLAB queues the a
> couple of higher order pages and can so serve a couple of requests without
>
David Miller writes:
> From: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:12:22 +1100
>
> > *I* never had a problem with a few extra system calls. I don't
> > understand why you (apparently) do.
>
> We're stuck with them forever, they are hard to version and extend
>
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Tim Bird wrote:
>
> Added Steven and John to CC
>
> > I applied the patches in patch-2.6.23.1-rt11-broken-out.tar.bz2
> > to a Linux kernel version 2.6.23.1 (along with a few other
> > board specific patches).
> >
> > I got the
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 15:15 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Max Asbock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Now that the 32-bit and 64-bit x86 machine check handlers live next to
> > each other a certain asymmetry in functionality is apparent. Notably,
> > the 64-bit machine check handler implements a
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, David Miller wrote:
> > As a result, we may allocate more than a page of data in the
> > non-TSO case when exactly one page is desired.
Well this is likely the result of the SLUB regression. If you allocate an
order 1 page then the zone locks need to be taken. SLAB queues
On Nov 15, 2007 5:27 AM, Kay Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 20:19 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Kay Sievers wrote:
> >
> > > Could it be an init-order problem, where something tries to use the
> > > block subsystem? Before it is initialized with:
>
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Tim Bird wrote:
Added Steven and John to CC
> I applied the patches in patch-2.6.23.1-rt11-broken-out.tar.bz2
> to a Linux kernel version 2.6.23.1 (along with a few other
> board specific patches).
>
> I got the following compilation error:
>
> GEN
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 06:37:32PM -0700, Alex Chiang wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> * Gary Hade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 01:11:02PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:51:22AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > Ok, again, I want to see the IBM people sign off
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:36:05PM -0700, Alex Chiang wrote:
> * Alex Chiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > Actually, I just reworked my patch this morning, and believe that
> > I have a much cleaner implementation now that should fix a lot of
> > the errors you saw.
Sorry, I lost access to the
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 08:45:28AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 08:56:20 -0700 Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> > David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > From: Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:23:13 -0600
> > >
> > >> As seen when
From: Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 11:21:36 +1100
> On Thursday 15 November 2007 10:46, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:48:44 +0800
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Applied and I'll
Andi Kleen writes:
> > This only works when counting (not sampling) and only for self-monitoring.
>
> It works for global monitoring too.
How would you provide access to the counters of another process?
Through an extension to ptrace perhaps?
Paul.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Thursday 15 November 2007 10:46, David Miller wrote:
> From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:48:44 +0800
> > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Applied and I'll queue it up for -stable too.
Good result. Thanks, everyone!
-
To unsubscribe from this
I applied the patches in patch-2.6.23.1-rt11-broken-out.tar.bz2
to a Linux kernel version 2.6.23.1 (along with a few other
board specific patches).
I got the following compilation error:
GEN /home/tbird/work/rt-preempt/build/tx49/Makefile
CHK include/linux/version.h
CHK
Andi,
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 03:24:11PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 05:09:09AM -0800, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >
> > Partially true. The file descriptor becomes really useful when you sample.
> > You leverage the file descriptor to receive notifications of counter
> >
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 03:41:43PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:37:13 -0600
>
> > No, the usual strategy for debugging problems -outside- SLOB is to
> > switch to another allocator with more extensive debugging facilities.
>
>
On 11/14/2007 06:51 PM, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> What does it mean when a pointer to an inode has a value of -1?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=334181
>
>
> /usr/src/debug/kernel-2.6.22/linux-2.6.22.x86_64/block/ll_rw_blk.c:3139
Oops, this is 2.6.22.9...
-
To unsubscribe from
Hi,
is there a way to so misprogramm an APIC that a physical interrupt results
in two interrupts delivered?
Regards
Oliver
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
101 - 200 of 1206 matches
Mail list logo
