Linux-Development-Sys Digest #611, Volume #6 Sat, 10 Apr 99 22:14:15 EDT
Contents:
nfsd and inode reuse (mlw)
Re: RH5.2, Solaris and NFS (John Murtari)
Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...) (Joe Zeff)
Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: kernel_thread()'s become zombies (David Grothe)
Re: Linux task switching, schedule(), and do_timer() (Alexander Viro)
Where to get GCC latest for RH 5.1 ("Richard Copeman")
Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...) (Alexander Viro)
Writers wanted for zine articles. (Port Lord)
module-info (Svein K Svendsen)
ISR: Kernel->User space call (Milos Dedecek)
Linux NFS server, Solaris cient, bad news ... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Device drivers ("Hugo Halvorsen")
Re: kernel_thread()'s become zombies ("B. James Phillippe")
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 ("Dan M. Johnson
(bagzman)(LinuxBox1)")
Re: Writers wanted for zine articles. (Frank v Waveren)
Re: ISR: Kernel->User space call (Joe Pfeiffer)
Re: System development methodologies (Need Help) (Alexander Viro)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Andrew Comech)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: nfsd and inode reuse
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 12:56:58 +0000
I have a strange problem with a Solaris machine connected to a Linux
server.
It seems that if, in rapid succession, a file is created, deleted, and a
new directory is created. In NFS the directory gets the same inode as
the previous file. For some reason, the Solaris box wants to think this
inode is a file until the nfs client refreshes. As you can imagine this
breaks a few scripts. Also, it does not happen 100% of the time (joy ;-(
).
I have a script:
>> resuse.sh
touch fubar
ls -i fubar
rm fubar
mkdir rabuf
ls -id rabuf
rmdir rabuf
<<
When executed on a local disk, ext2 uses two different inodes. When
executed on an NFS volume, it uses the same "inode."
The questions are:
Is the reuse of the inode on the NFS mounted volume a problem? or, is it
some other level of cache coherency protocol that is breaking down?
If it is a Solaris client bug, is there a work around?
If it is a Linux server bug, is there a fix?
So, before I start hacking nfsd, maybe it is already fixed ;-)
Also, has anyone else seen this behavior?
If you, can, respond by e-mail. Thanks.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Take the Mohawk Software Computer Survey at: www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: John Murtari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: RH5.2, Solaris and NFS
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:25:03 -0400
Yes, we are experiencing NFS "hangs" between Solaris and Linux, fairly
busy systems we get problems 2-3 times/day will loss of one of the
mountd's.
Finally, we just put a monitor in place to make sure NFS daemons hadn't
stopped running, and to restart them if they had. Have seen no
corruption,
but most of our stuff is READ only.
Have seen other people noticing this, but have not seen any comments
from
anyone "in the know" from either Linux Folks or Sun on a solution.
John Murtari
http://www.thebook.com/
> 1. Rebuilt nfs-server-2.2beta40.
>
> 2. upgraded to kernel 2.2.5 with latest nfs-server-2.2beta40.
>
> 3. Contacted SunSolve. They had one ticket that referenced this
> product. The customer closed it with mention of upgrading
> Linux to 2.1.x kernel. Unable to find out who the customer is.
>
> 4. Calling for help from anybody.
>
> Please also send any replies directly.
>
> Marv Nachatelo
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
John
______________________________________________________
Customer Service Sofware Workshop Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] "TheBook.Com" (TM)
315-635-1968, x-211
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Zeff)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...)
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 19:12:04 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> There isn't any connection between what I wrote and notions
>> of "process improvement". There is a difference in goals
>> and available resources.
>
>Sure there is, unless one stagnates a the lowest levels of technology.
>OK, substitute "product evolution" and "keeping up with the times" then.
>
>Emacs? How could anything be worse?? Guaranteed: if the tools were
>better free UNIX would be a lot more accepted. There's still the problem
>of obsolete monolithic design of the kernel offerings however.
>
...and a whole bunch of anti-linux/anit-unix advocacy that doesn't
belong on comp.os.linux.help. I see no reason why any of this tripe
belongs on this group, or was cross-posted to it in the first place.
It has nothing to do with helping linux users, and I don't think I've
ever seen anything helpful from the poster. *Plonk!*
---
Joe Zeff
The Guy With the Sideburns
The point here is that there are stupid people all over.
http://www.lasfs.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...)
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 15:27:33 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> ...and a whole bunch of anti-linux/anit-unix advocacy that doesn't
> belong on comp.os.linux.help. I see no reason why any of this tripe
> belongs on this group, or was cross-posted to it in the first place.
> It has nothing to do with helping linux users, and I don't think I've
> ever seen anything helpful from the poster. *Plonk!*
That pretty much sums up all the responses here: that the lack of
progress is because of the emotional attachment most afficionados here
have to obsolete paradigms along with failure to even attempt to see
outside of their little, little boxes. Good luck dinosaurs.
Don
------------------------------
From: David Grothe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kernel_thread()'s become zombies
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 20:56:04 GMT
Early in the routine that constitutes the child, do the following:
exit_files(current) ; /* close all files */
exit_mm(current) ; /* detach user pages */
current->pgrp = 1 ; /* detach from parent */
current->session = 1 ; /* now owned by "init" */
current->uid = 0 ; /* become root */
current->euid = 0 ; /* become root */
current->tty = NULL ; /* detach from any tty */
current->mm->arg_start = current->mm->arg_end = 0;
strcpy(current->comm, "MyProc") ; /* set my display name (short string) */
Make sure the string "MyProc" is fairly short. This will be the display name
of your process in a ps. It will be enclosed in ()'s.
Have the parent remember the process id somewhere in your driver.
Then when you want to kill off your process do this (assume process id is in
"my_pid"):
if (my_pid > 0) /* Only stop the kernel thread if running */
kill_proc(my_pid, SIGINT, 1) ;
Make sure that any waits that you do in the process are interruptible.
-- Dave
"B. James Phillippe" wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I'm writing a module (for 2.2) which starts a kernel thread at insmod time.
> I have run into two problems. The first is that my thread is a child of
> insmod unless I start it from outside process context. Currently I work
> around that by launching it from a kernel timer which expires momentarily
> after insmod. The other problem is that when my thread functions exits, it
> becomes a zombie. Is there a way for me to cleanly remove the thread at
> rmmod time when it is finished doing it's work?
>
> thanks,
> -bp
> --
> B. James Phillippe . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Software Engineer, WGT Inc. . http://www.terran.org/~bryan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Subject: Re: Linux task switching, schedule(), and do_timer()
Date: 10 Apr 1999 17:07:39 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arkadion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How does the timer interrupt switch tasks?
>Shouldn't do_timer() switch tasks?
>It doesn't look as if it does but then if it doesn't what should?
>do_timer() is called by the timer interrupt and usually the timer
>interrupt switches tasks... so what's the deal with do_timer()?
>It just looks as if sets some flags and returns...
>???
*Bottom* *half* *can* *not* *cause* *a* *context* *switch*.
It's UNIX. BTW, this question belongs to comp.unix.internals. And it's
fairly basic thing. In UNIX (any UNIX, including Linux) processes can
not be preempted when they are in the kernel mode. Timer handler doesn't
call schedule(). If it decides that timeslice is over it sets the flag
that is tested upon the return to user mode (either from interrupt or
from system call). If the flag is set the glue code on the boundary of
kernel and user modes calls schedule(). See arch/<foo>/kernel/entry.S
for details. It's done that way in any UNIX kernel. Take the Daemon
Book - it describes 4.4BSD kernel, but such issues are same in all
Unices.
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: "Richard Copeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Where to get GCC latest for RH 5.1
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 22:06:31 +0100
Hi,
Probably an annoying newbie question but can some kind soul point me to a
site (UK prefereably) where I can get the latest stable gcc for RedHat 5.1
please?
TIA,
Richard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...)
Date: 10 Apr 1999 17:11:54 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That pretty much sums up all the responses here: that the lack of
>progress is because of the emotional attachment most afficionados here
>have to obsolete paradigms along with failure to even attempt to see
>outside of their little, little boxes. Good luck dinosaurs.
Translation: "I got it: they don't do things in the way I like because
they like their way better". Congratulations, it took you several days
to realize, but at last you got it.
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Port Lord)
Subject: Writers wanted for zine articles.
Date: 10 Apr 1999 19:29:32 GMT
Columbia 2032 (C2032) is looking for individuals who would like to write
articles for our zine. Topics include: Phone systems (cellular/normal),
Cryptography, IRC, TCP/IP, Programmiung,Information Warfare, Computer Security
and just about anything pertaining to computers /or phones. We have been around
approximately 10 months. We just released our biggest (93.4k) and best edition
yet, which can be downloaded under 'library at www.homestead.com/c2032 . In our
effort to expand our distribution, quality, and quantity of the zine, we are
looking for more writers and or willing people to distribute the zine. Our
subscribers and writers consist of people from within the hack/phreak community
and professional individuals alike. Please send all responses to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . We are a freelance zine so if it is money you want please
dont respond.
------------------------------
From: Svein K Svendsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: module-info
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:15:50 +0200
I have upgraded my rh5.2 with the new 2.2.5 kernel and can't figure out
how to
generate a new module-info-2.2.5 file. Hope somone will help me out.
Svein S.
------------------------------
From: Milos Dedecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ISR: Kernel->User space call
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 23:19:34 +0200
Hi
I'm writing a kernel space device driver.
In my interrupt service routine (kernel space) I want to notify user's
programm, that the data has arrived. How can I do this?
I want the user to register a function (in user space), which will be
than called from my ISR. Is this possible? Or is there another way?
Semaphores etc.?
Thanks
--
Milos Dedecek
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: matrix.lists.linux.kernel
Subject: Linux NFS server, Solaris cient, bad news ...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 22:49:11 GMT
I've got my home directory on a Linux box, running Redhat 5.2, kernel
2.2.5, and the appropriate Redhat 2.2 patches. It's mounted on a
Solaris 2.5.1 box, and I try to configure and compile gcc.
During the configure process, I get write error failures writing to
files, either creating the spec.h file at the end of configure, or cc
complains about not being able to create executables during
configure. A couple of times, ex started up for some reason, and once,
a .h file in the parent directory got overwritten by an object file.
When it failed on the spec.h file, the file was created with 0 length,
it was owned by me, mode 644, (ls on server and client) but the client
system bechaved as if it was owned by some other user.
I tried 2.0.36, 2.2.4-ac1, and 2.2.5 on the server, and two Solaris
clients running 2.5.1 and 2.6
If no-one's seen (and fixed) this already, I'll turn on NFSD_DEBUG and
try to get some data next week.
TIA
--
Tony Lill, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
President, A. J. Lill Consultants fax/data (519) 650 3571
539 Grand Valley Dr., Cambridge, Ont. N3H 2S2 (519) 241 2461
=============== http://www.ajlc.waterloo.on.ca/ ================
"Welcome to All Things UNIX, where if it's not UNIX, it's CRAP!"
------------------------------
From: "Hugo Halvorsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Device drivers
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 20:06:50 +0200
Help!
I just can't find RedHat X-Win drivers for my graphics adapters!
The cards are: -Hercules Terminator 128/3D "GLH" and Diamond Viper V550
------------------------------
From: "B. James Phillippe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kernel_thread()'s become zombies
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 16:44:14 -0700
On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, David Grothe wrote:
> Early in the routine that constitutes the child, do the following:
Hi Dave,
I did all that you said and it made no difference; after the kill_proc, the
thread wakes from interruptible_sleep_on, then does a MOD_DEC_USE_COUNT,
and return 0. I still end up with a zombie thread. I am starting this
thread from a kernel timer; is there any way for this to work?
% ps lw 32694
FLAGS UID PID PPID PRI NI SIZE RSS WCHAN STA TTY TIME COMMAND
44 0 32694 0 20 20 0 0 3277c4 Z N ? 0:00
(thread-test <zombie>)
thanks,
-bp
--
B. James Phillippe . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Software Engineer, WGT Inc. . http://www.terran.org/~bryan
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,linux.redhat.misc,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 08:55:47 +0200
From: "Dan M. Johnson (bagzman)(LinuxBox1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0
Eh well, I love backwards compatibility, but if it happens to speed things up, go
for it I say. The thing is that as long it dosn't act like a Micro$oft POS, sure
:) The thing about it really is, is speed. If it does happen to increase speed,
sure! If not (which I hear from some people), then I prefer the older i386 method.
-Dan- http://sypol.dynip.com
Tomasz Korycki wrote:
> Johan Kullstam wrote:
> >
> > d s f o x @ c o g s c i . u c s d . e d u (David Fox) writes:
> >
> > > "Idea Man" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > Does anyone else think this would be a good idea? Keep the i386 tree, and
> > > > add an i686 tree that is optimized for P-II/Celeron/P-III processors.
> > > >
> > > > This might be a pain in the butt for the mirrors (more hard drive space
> > > > used), but for some mirrors this would be just fine. This would also make
> > > > Linux higher performing for all the people with flashy new Pentium-III
> > > > machines...
> > >
> > > How much performance improvement would there be?
> >
> > based on my experience with egcs over the past year, not much.
> >
> > the pentium classic seems to be hypersensitive to scheduling, but the
> > i686 (i have a pentiumpro) seems have roughly the same performance
> > (using time on a few of my programs) for compiles with -march=i386,
> > i486 or pentiumpro. -march=pentium hurt speed by about 10%.
> >
> Actually, if You have FP-heavy code (graphics, raytracing, FEA, CFD,
> Stats, simulation), P6-optimised code can gain You as much as 15-20%,
> compared to i386.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank v Waveren)
Subject: Re: Writers wanted for zine articles.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 01:50:49 GMT
I'm not interested, but just out of curiosity I have 2 questions:
Why would being freelance rule out pay? Don't you mean free-ware? or GNU etc?
A magazine for the 'hack/phreak community' as you call it, coming from an AOL
user?
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Port Lord) writes:
> Columbia 2032 (C2032) is looking for individuals who would like to write
> articles for our zine. Topics include: Phone systems (cellular/normal),
> Cryptography, IRC, TCP/IP, Programmiung,Information Warfare, Computer Security
> and just about anything pertaining to computers /or phones. We have been around
> approximately 10 months. We just released our biggest (93.4k) and best edition
> yet, which can be downloaded under 'library at www.homestead.com/c2032 . In our
> effort to expand our distribution, quality, and quantity of the zine, we are
> looking for more writers and or willing people to distribute the zine. Our
> subscribers and writers consist of people from within the hack/phreak community
> and professional individuals alike. Please send all responses to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] . We are a freelance zine so if it is money you want please
> dont respond.
--
Frank v Waveren
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ# 10074100
------------------------------
From: Joe Pfeiffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ISR: Kernel->User space call
Date: 10 Apr 1999 19:07:52 -0600
Milos Dedecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm writing a kernel space device driver.
> In my interrupt service routine (kernel space) I want to notify user's
> programm, that the data has arrived. How can I do this?
>
> I want the user to register a function (in user space), which will be
> than called from my ISR. Is this possible? Or is there another way?
> Semaphores etc.?
No, at least with Intel architecture (and I expect everybody else's
too). Calling a user level procedure from the kernel would be a
gaping security hole, since the user level procedure has to be able to
do a return back into the kernel. If that's possible, then a user
program would be able to forge a return address on the stack and do a
return to anywhere in the kernel it wanted. If your user-level
procedure is actually run in kernel mode, well, that's an even more
gaping hole.
The normal way to do what you want is to support select() in your
driver (I guess with the new kernels the appropriate file_operations
entry is now called poll?), and then have the user process call
select() to wait for data to come in. If it has to be truly
asynchronous, use threads.
--
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Subject: Re: System development methodologies (Need Help)
Date: 5 Apr 1999 07:06:23 -0400
In article <01be7f4e$3e2a78a0$850c8bca@default>,
Johnny Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi! I'm doing some research about system development. Can u tell me what is
>System Development Methodologies is, and why we use them?? If u have any
>information regarding this, please let me know, thank you.
Hi! You are asking us to do the homework for you. Can u tell us what is your
school's policy wrt to cheating is, and why should we help you?? If u have any
information regarding this, please let us know, thank you.
--
Luser, n.:
Human-like creature that doesn't dare to use elevator, because of
its belief that only horrible geeks can master arcane and obscure art of
using control panel.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Comech)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,linux.redhat.misc,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 10 Apr 1999 21:58:12 -0500
On 08 Apr 1999 14:45:41 -0400, Johan Kullstam wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (who?) writes:
>
>> : In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> : Enkidu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> : > This is a fiction. Redhat do *not* develop drivers.
>
>> stupid comment, but I cant help but chastise poor english, which I am a
>> master of (poor english for those not following very closely).
>> that do, it should be does.
>
>not if you're from a commonwealth country - which includes new zealand
>(where is the old zealand btw?). in *english* (as opposed to american
>english) redhat is a group entity and considered plural. therefore,
>redhat do.
If you were to say "redHat sucks", you'd say "redHat sucks", though.
Cheese,
Andrew
--
Looking for a Linux-compatible V.90 modem? See
http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~comech/tools/CheapBox.html#modem
Expect to pay below $50.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
