Linux-Development-Sys Digest #657, Volume #7 Mon, 6 Mar 00 22:13:19 EST
Contents:
Re: How to determine the Maximum nymber of system call per seconds? (Sebastien
Dessimoz)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Warren Young)
Re: what is the relative overhead between ... (Warren Young)
Recompiled Kernel W/SMP support ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What's GNU/Linux? (Grant Edwards)
Plz give me some advices for porting Linux to StrongArm SA1110. ("���´�")
Help! app lock up upon entry - shared libraries suspected (Sten)
Documentation for porting LINUX on SA1110 ("���´�")
SCSI and video probs on Col. Classic (root)
Re: what is the relative overhead between ... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Help with printk (Chris H)
[Q] scsi device probing (Kim Tae Hyung)
Re: What's GNU/Linux? (Christopher Browne)
Re: System hanging with SMP-Kernel 2.2.13 (SuSE6.3)? (Dixon Ly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 13:17:30 -0800
From: Sebastien Dessimoz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: How to determine the Maximum nymber of system call per seconds?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How to determine the Maximum nymber of system call per seconds?
> Is there any formular I can use to get this value??
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Actually I do not know any formula about it and I do not think there is
any, simply because it depends on the system call...
Indeed, in Linux, when a user-space program issues a system call, an
interruption is thrown and then the Interrupt Service Routine calls the
right function to execute.
Anyway if you still want to know the maximum number of system calls per
second (for a particular system call), you can write a simple loop and
try to profile this simple program with a the "gprof" utility.
Good luck,
Sebastien
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 15:45:46 -0700
From: Warren Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Nix wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mario Klebsch) writes:
>
> > Err, WinNT is UNIX,
>
> WTF?
>
> WinNT is POSIX-compliant if and only if you take the most restricted and
> impoverished subset of POSIX you can find;
Furthermore, if you compile a program against the POSIX API (which is
optional, not included is a standard installation), your program cannot
call the Win32 API! Wanna put up a window in that POSIX program?
Ooops, sorry, can't happen. Wanna open a network connection to a local
X server and work around the limitation that way? Nope, sockets aren't
POSIX.1. Too bad.
--
= Warren -- See the *ix pages at http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent/ix/
=
= ICBM Address: 36.8274040 N, 108.0204086 W, alt. 1714m
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 15:54:19 -0700
From: Warren Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: what is the relative overhead between ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What is the relative overhead between ...
>
> 1. A process that dlopen()'s an executeable and directly calls a desired
> function within.
>
> 2. A process that (w/o forking) calls execv() to run an executeable in
> which main() will call the desired function within.
I guess that depends a whole lot on the program you're exec()'ing,
doesn't it?
The simplest way to find out is to Try It. exec() you can try
trivially, and dlopen() et al. are easy to use.
One suspects dlopen() to be faster unless you're dragging in tons of
definitions. Keep in mind, libc and every other shared object works via
mechanisms not unlike dlopen(). You might drag in a few dozen symbols
from libc with a program not much more complex than "hello, world".
--
= Warren -- See the *ix pages at http://www.cyberport.com/~tangent/ix/
=
= ICBM Address: 36.8274040 N, 108.0204086 W, alt. 1714m
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Recompiled Kernel W/SMP support
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 23:22:10 GMT
I have recompiled the kernel with SMP support enabled (I have a 2 PIII
600's), and when I try and boot from the new kernel I get the following
error:
Loading aic7xxx module
/lib/aic7xxx.o: kernel-module version mismatch
/lib/aic7xxx.o was compiled for kernel version 2.2.12-20smp
while this kernel is version 2.2.12-20.
it then panics because it can't find the root file system.
I did the following to make the kernel:
cd /usr/src/linux
make distclean
make menuconfig
-> Enabled SMP
make dep
make bzImage modules modules_install
cp /usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot/bzImage /boot/linux.test
Any idea what is going on and how I can fix it?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: grant@nowhere. (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: What's GNU/Linux?
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 23:32:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nelson Minar wrote:
>I think Stallman's "GNU/Linux" thing is obnoxious too, but let's not
>get confused about one important point:
>
>grant@nowhere. (Grant Edwards) writes:
>> My point: Gcc is a result of the open-source software movement, not
>> the cause of it.
>
>Sure. But the sheer existence of the open-source software movement is
>due in large part to Stallman's years of evangelism. He created a lot
>of free software, he articulated the reasons for free software, he
>organized free software people. He led by example, he wrote a lot of
>the code in gcc.
I think RMS has had a big influence on the open source
movement, but I think it would have existed anyway. There has
always been a lot of open-source software that didn't come from
the FSF. Things like uucp, rcs, a whole slew of stuff I
remeber from DECUS tapes (including a C compiler), a lot of the
BSD stuff, kermit, etc. RMS and the FSF became a focal point
for the open-source community, but I think the community would
still be here without them.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Did an Italian CRANE
at OPERATOR just experience
visi.com uninhibited sensations in
a MALIBU HOT TUB?
------------------------------
From: "���´�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Plz give me some advices for porting Linux to StrongArm SA1110.
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:24:25 +0900
Now I'm trying to port the LINUX OS to Strong Arm processor of SA1110. From
Intel site, I can find
out some materials about the installation LINUX on SA1100, however, there
are no documents about
the installation for SA1110.
Can you give me some advices for porting LINUX OS to SA1110?
Thanks in advance
------------------------------
Subject: Help! app lock up upon entry - shared libraries suspected
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sten)
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 01:18:27 GMT
I have been programming Linux for quite a number of years. Not once have I
cried out for help. Well, this time is different.
The Configuration:
--
My Linux boxes are running RH6.1 and are Intel P2 or AMD-K63 with at least
266MHz in speed. Memory >128M. Disk > 8G.
The Problem:
--
I am experiencing the problem on one machine, dewey, but the same code
works fine on the others (boston for example.) I narrowed the problem to a
small piece of pThreads code. Seems if I statically link the app,
everything works fine. Dynamic link seems to have a problem. The test app
dyna-links in:
/lib/libc.so.6
/lib/ld-linux.so.2
When I run it, it just hangs without making it to the first line in the
main program. When I run it in gdb, it still hangs but I can break it and
backtrace to show BACKTRACE_01 (at end).
Recent History:
--
I have loaded 3 programs from the net. I loaded:
unixODBC-1_8_6.tar.gz
odbc-odbc-bridge-0_6_0_0_linux-glibc.tar.gz
slclient.tar (merant sequelink drivers)
I have also moved the following directories to a larger partion and added
symbolic links to them:
/usr/lib -> /devapps/sub_part01/usr/lib/
/usr/share -> /devapps/sub_part01/usr/share/
Suspicions:
--
I am not sure, but I think the problem could be with moving my share
directory and leaving a symbolic link. I was unaware there was a problem
with this, but anything is suspect.
Since Merant only gave me a binary to dnload, I have no way of knowing if
they did anything. Their installation program leaves *alot* to be desired,
so I would generally assume a level of sloppiness.
Ass kissing:
--
ANY help you guys can give would be greatly appreciated. This is a real
stumper/head-scratcher.
Thanks,
Sten
--[ Dewey: uname -a ]----------------------
Linux dewey 2.2.12-20 #1 Mon Sep 27 10:40:35 EDT 1999 i686 unknown
--[ BACKTRACE_01 ]-------------------------
#0 0x4003458b in __sigsuspend (set=0xbffff664)
at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sigsuspend.c:48
#1 0x804cebd in __pthread_lock (lock=0x401052e0, self=0x80536c0)
at restart.h:32
#2 0x804dbea in __pthread_mutex_lock (mutex=0x401052d0) at mutex.c:84
#3 0x40036aac in __new_exitfn () at atexit.c:51
#4 0x40036a55 in __on_exit (func=0x804bc34 <pthread_exit_process>,
arg=0x0)
at on_exit.c:26
#5 0x804b330 in pthread_initialize () at pthread.c:346
#6 0x804b8e0 in __pthread_initialize () at pthread.c:351
#7 0x4006de94 in ptmalloc_init () at malloc.c:1672
#8 0x4007183d in malloc_hook_ini (sz=392, caller=0x40036b04) at
malloc.c:1724
#9 0x4006e366 in __libc_malloc (bytes=392) at malloc.c:2630
#10 0x40036b04 in __new_exitfn () at atexit.c:70
#11 0x40036b81 in atexit (func=0x4000a610 <_dl_fini>) at atexit.c:28
#12 0x4002e138 in __libc_start_main (main=0x804a18c <main>, argc=1,
argv=0xbffffaa4, init=0x8049b80 <_init>, fini=0x804e58c <_fini>,
rtld_fini=0x4000a610 <_dl_fini>, stack_end=0xbffffa9c)
at ../sysdeps/generic/libc-start.c:64
===========================================
------------------------------
From: "���´�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Documentation for porting LINUX on SA1110
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:40:17 +0900
Now I am trying to porting LINUX OS on the StrongArm processor SA1110. From
intel site, I can get the materials about SA1100, however, there are no
documents for installing LINUX on SA1110. Can anyone give me some advices
for installing LINUX on SA1110?
Thanks in advance.
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SCSI and video probs on Col. Classic
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.m68k,maus.os.linux68k
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 01:29:28 GMT
Hi there.
I'm attempting to get Linux to boot on my Mac Color Classic, on a lark. I
can get the thing to boot.. the drive detects.. then the system hangs
completely on the partition detection. I don't know what to do. Please
help.
Also-- the default font works just fine in mono, but with "Color by
Penguin", the text turns an OFF-WHITE. On a white background, this makes
it AWFULLY hard to read. :P Things work better when I specify that the
font "VGA8x8" be used-- IT is quite readable in color mode, as it uses a
darker grey-- HOWEVER, since the Color Classic's screen is only 512x384, I
don't get a full 80x24 this way...
Please, please, please help with these issues if you can.
Below, find a dump of what I see as the kernel is booting up. The last
thing you see is the last thing I see before the machine hangs completely.
(And yes, I typed this up myself, so there may be little typos)
Thanks in advance for your help! :)
--Caspian
P.S. E-mailing your response to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" would be quite
convenient-- if you respond, PLEASE also e-mail your response there... By
all means, post it to the newsgroup (for the benefit of others with my
problem now or in the future)... BUT e-mail it too. Thanks!
====================================================================
md driver 0.36.3 MAX_MD_DEV=4, MAX_REAL=8
Macintosh SCSI: resetting the SCSI bus... done
scsi0: at port 50F10000 irq 19 options CAN_QUEUE=16 CMD_PER_LUN=
2 release=1
scsi0: generic options AUTOSENSE generic release=7
mac_esp_detect: num_hosts detected 0 setup 1
scsi0 :
scsi : 1 host.
Vendor: QUANTUM Model: CTS80S Rev: 4.2
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision:
02
Detected scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
scsi : detected 1 SCSI disk total.
SCSI device sda: hdwr sector= 512 bytes. Sectors= 166200 [81 MB]
[0.1 GB]
Checking for internal Macintosh ethernet (SONIC).. none.
Partition check:
sda:
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: what is the relative overhead between ...
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 01:35:30 GMT
On Mon, 06 Mar 2000 15:54:19 -0700 Warren Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|>
|> What is the relative overhead between ...
|>
|> 1. A process that dlopen()'s an executeable and directly calls a desired
|> function within.
|>
|> 2. A process that (w/o forking) calls execv() to run an executeable in
|> which main() will call the desired function within.
|
| I guess that depends a whole lot on the program you're exec()'ing,
| doesn't it?
Perhaps. Since it is to be the same thing either way, what it does
shouldn't be the issue that I can see.
| The simplest way to find out is to Try It. exec() you can try
| trivially, and dlopen() et al. are easy to use.
If, as you suggest above, what is being run will affect the result, then
that would imply that I would need to implement it for both cases just
to be able to try it.
| One suspects dlopen() to be faster unless you're dragging in tons of
| definitions. Keep in mind, libc and every other shared object works via
| mechanisms not unlike dlopen(). You might drag in a few dozen symbols
| from libc with a program not much more complex than "hello, world".
The difference might be that the "program" won't be main() and hopefully
won't have the code that runs before main() (crt0 stuff). The exec()
functions also clear out the virtual memory (probably just removing the
segment tables and deallocating any affected swap space).
What I want to do is run some compiled code for web pages. Currently I am
doing it as CGI. I don't want to statically link it into the web server.
But I could add code to the web server to do the dynamic loading, or if
the existing dynamic loading facility will do what I want, just use that.
--
| Phil Howard - KA9WGN | for headlines that | Just say no to absurd patents |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | really matter: | Boycott Amazon.Com (AMZN) |
| Dallas - Texas - USA | linuxhomepage.com | Shop http://bn.com/ instead |
------------------------------
From: Chris H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help with printk
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 21:05:37 -0500
Nils Wygant wrote:
> I nee some help.......
>
> I'm writing a device driver and I can't see any of the debugging
> printk's that are made from within the module code. Printk is the kernel
> equivalent to printf but it sends it's output to the console. I've read
> that when using printk's from within X (i'm using RedHat 6.0 and Gnome)
> you won't see the output because ofX's use of "Virtual" terminals......???
> I did a man on xterm and saw a -C option but this had no effect.
> It's suppose to redirect all Console output to the active "virtual" terminal.
> It also says that it's not guaranteed to work. o-well.... this was the case it
>seems.
> Anyway, does anyone have any suggestions?
>
> Thanks,
> -Nils
Check out /etc/syslog.conf. There is a line (usually commented out) saying kern.*
/dev/console
Uncomment this line to get all printk messages to the console instead of
/var/log/messages
(which is where you'll find them now.)
You may have to experiment with the actual device you want to divert output to.
Suggest you
make a backup copy of syslog.conf before you do anything else!
-Chris Hallinan
clh at zing dot net
------------------------------
From: Kim Tae Hyung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Q] scsi device probing
Date: 07 Mar 2000 11:00:56 +0900
After the system boots (or the modules are inserted),
scsi device structure is initialized, I think.
(e.g. scsi_device).
But, when I connect one more scsi device(disk) online,
how can I probe that device, and insert the kernel structure without
rebooting?
What I want to do is to do lowlevel command to the newly inserted
device.
( e.g. # dd if=something of=/dev/sda bs=xxxx )
^^^^^^^^^^^
newly inserted device
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: What's GNU/Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 02:19:52 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Grant Edwards would say:
>In article <8a0i2c$sl9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph T. Adams wrote:
>
>>But can I respectfully ask where you or I or any of us would be
>>without gcc?
>
>Respectuflly; we'd be using a different free C compiler. Were
>gcc not around filling that niche, the DECUS C compiler (which
>is what I used before gcc) or one of the other free ones would
>evolve to do so. I'm not trying to minimize gcc --
>Gcc/binutils is a tremendous piece of work which I've been
>gratefully using for 10+ years. But, writing C compilers,
>linkers, and assemblers isn't black magic. It takes a lot of
>hard work to do something like gcc, but it doesn't depend on
>the deivine inspiration of a single person.
Some may recall Sozobon C on the Atari ST; it wasn't great, but could
have been hacked into something better than it was.
There are two other notable C compilers that have relatively
languished:
a) lcc, a C compiler that was written using literate programming
techniques. It's not nearly as sophisticated as GCC at optimization,
but with attention, could improve.
b) TENDRA. It largely postdates GCC, and so is not an entirely fair
comparison. On The Other Hand, I find it extremely regrettable that
it has languished virtually ignored, as it has several *very*
interesting ideas:
1. Like GCC, it supports multiple front ends. Unlike GCC, those
have included some remarkably different options including Common
LISP.
2. Extending from the "multiple FE" property, it was designed to
provide the ability to integrate code together that was written in
multiple languages. In effect, it provides its own ABI, which
"beats out" C++'s lack of ABI.
3. Extending from GCC's "multiple back ends" implementation of
RTI, TENDRA would generate platform-independent object code that
would be tuned for a particular architecture at *run* time.
>>But without gcc and RMS and the FSF, would something like Linux
>>or 95% of the rest of the free software out there be possible
>>(using the term "free" in the sense of freedom)?
>
>Yes, it would.
The appearance "of the world" would probably be fairly different, but
certainly there would be many similarities.
>>Or am I missing something obvious?
>
>I think so. There isn't a serious alternative to gcc not
>becase such a thing is impossible, but because there isn't a
>need. We only really _need_ one good open source C compiler.
>Gcc was in the right place at the right time with the right
>people working on it. If it wasn't, then the same environment
>would have resulted in the evolution and proliferation of one
>of the other species of free C compilers to fill the niche that
>gcc now occupies.
>
>My point: Gcc is a result of the open-source software
>movement, not the cause of it.
I'd tend to give GCC a *bit* more credit than that, but can't justify
disagreeing *violently.*
--
VERITAS AETERNA -- DON'T SETQ T.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dixon Ly)
Subject: Re: System hanging with SMP-Kernel 2.2.13 (SuSE6.3)?
Date: 7 Mar 00 02:26:04 GMT
Well, I ran into similar problems after recompiling my
kernel to support SMP. Let me say that my system is running
the stock RedHat 6.1 distrib with most of the updates using
the gnome interface...
The kernel is 2.2.12. It seems like the system was hanging
after periods of inactivity. So I first disabled the screen
lock. The system hang again after I left and came back from
a movie that same night.
Then I disable the screensaver altogether. Since then, the
machine has been up and running for over three days. At
this point, I cannot absolutely say that the problem has
gone away until after a couple more weeks of uptime. But it
does look hopeful :-)
For those who think I got power management compiled into the kernel,
I don't...
-d
In article <89hqcb$c8v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>In article <890g54$r75$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Yuan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>| Is there anybody who knows whether there is any problem with the SMP-kernel
>| 2.2.13 [SuSE 6.3]?
>| We've got a problem with this kernel on a Dell's PowerEdge 6350
>| system [4 x PIII Xeon 550MHz, 2GB EDO DIMM RAM, Intel's Ether DualPort Pro100+]:
>| it hangs sometimes.
>| The /var/log/messages file didn't show any hints about what caused the hanging.
>| Usually the system could only be reusable after rebooting (press reset-button)
>| again (it didn't respond to pings during the hanging or anything else,
>| i.e.: no telnet, no ftp-> a total k.o. :-<].
>
> I've seen this on a distressing number of Linux SMP systems, and Alan
>Cox seems to say that he agrees. On the other hand I have two systems on
>2.2.6 and one on 2.2.10 which have been up for 44/88/69 days under heavy
>network load. 2.2.14 seems better than 2.2.13, and you might try Alan's
>latest pre-release patch if you are brave.
>
>| Hope I can get a bit more hints from this gurus group, ;-).
>
> Wrong group, lots of helpful folks here, but the gurus are pretty
>quiet.
>--
>bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
> When taking small children to a carnival, always have them go potty
>*before* you let them go on the rides, and let them eat all the junk
>food and candy *after*.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
