On Wednesday 26 April 2006 20:01, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 02:25:00AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > In the case of migration the ugly case to properly handle is the
> > monotonic timer. That needs an offset yet it is absolutely forbidden
> > to provide that offset from th
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 01:33:40PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > So, maybe it belongs in clone as a "backwards" flag similar to
> > CLONE_NEWNS.
>
> I must note that currently every (?) flag allowed for unshare is also allowed
> for clone, so you need to do that anyway.
Currently. We are runnin
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 07:48:23AM -0400, Jeff Dike wrote:
> Currently. We are running out of CLONE_ bits - in mainline, there are
> three left
Errr, make that seven, and I can still see those being used up.
Jeff
-
On Friday 28 April 2006 13:48, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 01:33:40PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > > So, maybe it belongs in clone as a "backwards" flag similar to
> > > CLONE_NEWNS.
> > I must note that currently every (?) flag allowed for unshare is also
> > allowed for clone, s
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:54:31PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> Additionally, if this flag ever goes into clone, it mustn't be named
> CLONE_TIME, but CLONE_NEWTIME (or CLONE_NEWUTS). And given CLONE_NEWNS, it's
> IMHO ok to have unshare(CLONE_NEWTIME) to mean "unshare time namespace", even
> if
Blaisorblade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So we get back to Eric's objection (which I haven't understood but that's my
> problem).
My objection is that to handle the monotonic timer we need an additional
struct timespec argument when we create the time namespace.
There does not appear to be sp
These patches are 2.6.17 material. They are small bug fixes and cleanups -
the one functional change, skas0 support for 2G/2G hosts, is innocuous and
tested.
Jeff
---
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to
The MADVISE_REMOVE-checking code didn't clean up after itself.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.16/arch/um/os-Linux/process.c
===
--- linux-2.6.16.orig/arch/um/os-Linux/process.c2006-04-27
20:51:
From: Joris van Rantwijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A quick hack to allow skas0 mode to run on 2G/2G hosts.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.16/arch/um/Kconfig.i386
===
--- linux-2.6.16.orig/arch/um/Kconfig.i38
Bring defconfig up to date.
Also disable CONFIG_BLK_DEV_UBD_SYNC by default. By performing
synchronous I/O to the host, it slows things down, only protects
against host crashes, and can make a UML appear to hang while it
waits for the host's disk.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ind
From: "Victor V. Vengerov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We need to walk the region list properly.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.16/arch/um/kernel/physmem.c
===
--- linux-2.6.16.orig/arch/um/kernel/physmem.c 2
Blairsorblade noticed some confusion between our use of a system
call's return value and errno. This patch fixes a number of related
bugs -
using errno instead of a return value
using a return value instead of errno
forgetting to negate a error return to get a positive erro
From: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Remove redundant NULL checks before [kv]free + small CodingStyle cleanup
for arch/
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.16/arch/um/kernel/irq.c
==
On Friday 28 April 2006 17:15, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 03:54:31PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > Additionally, if this flag ever goes into clone, it mustn't be named
> > CLONE_TIME, but CLONE_NEWTIME (or CLONE_NEWUTS). And given CLONE_NEWNS,
> > it's IMHO ok to have unshare(CLONE
On Wednesday 26 April 2006 17:46, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 05:47:54PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> Why not just zero out the bits that the kernel knows about? Then, if
> we return -EINVAL, the process just looks at the remaining bits that
> are set to see what system calls the k
Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> These patches are 2.6.17 material.
"remove NULL checks and add some CodingStyle" isn't. Unless one considers
UML coding style to be a bug, which is an attractive idea ;)
So I gave that one an extra-special look - I'll push it along, thanks.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 10:28:46PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> Ok, this gives us a definite proposal, which I finally like:
>
> * to exclude sys_tee:
>
> bitmask = 0;
> set_bit(__NR_tee, bitmask);
> ptrace(PTRACE_SET_NOTRACE, bitmask);
>
> * to trace only sys_tee:
>
> bitmask = 0;
> set_bit(__
17 matches
Mail list logo
