On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 11:39 -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14 and
possibly posted as an update? :)
Would be wonderful!
Try this,
Hi,
2010/11/16 Ilyes Gouta ilyes.go...@gmail.com:
Hi,
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/11/16/1330233/The-200-Line-Linux-Kernel-Patch-That-Does-Wonders
patch: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=128978361700898w=2
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14 and
Hi,
I've been reading http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/16/402 and actually Lennart
has put some solid thoughts and arguments there and IMHO it was *somehow*
pretty convincing that this should be done at user-space, in conjunction
with tools such as systemd, albeit introducing more complexity in form
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Ilyes Gouta ilyes.go...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I've been reading http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/16/402 and actually Lennart
has put some solid thoughts and arguments there and IMHO it was *somehow*
pretty convincing that this should be done at user-space, in
Hi,
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/11/16/1330233/The-200-Line-Linux-Kernel-Patch-That-Does-Wonders
patch: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=128978361700898w=2
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14 and
possibly posted as an update? :)
Would be wonderful!
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
Hi,
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/11/16/1330233/The-200-Line-Linux-Kernel-Patch-That-Does-Wonders
patch: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=128978361700898w=2
Can we have this patch back ported into the current
IG == Ilyes Gouta ilyes.go...@gmail.com writes:
IG Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for
IG Fedora 14 and possibly posted as an update? :)
IG Would be wonderful!
Would be more wonderful to wait until the upstream development has
actually finished before cramming it into
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14 and
possibly posted as an update? :)
Would be wonderful!
Try this,
http://kyle.fedorapeople.org/kernel/2.6.35.8-59.xsched1/
i686 coming whenever mock
Hi,
According to phoronix, it would be queued for the 2.6.38 release.
actually works. If you really want it, Fedora provides all the tools to
build your own custom kernel package.
It's already on my todo list :)
-Ilyes
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III
Thanks Kyle for making it available!
-Ilyes
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14
and
possibly posted as an update? :)
On 11/16/2010 11:39 AM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14 and
possibly posted as an update? :)
Would be wonderful!
Try this,
On Tue, 16.11.10 16:58, Ilyes Gouta (ilyes.go...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/11/16/1330233/The-200-Line-Linux-Kernel-Patch-That-Does-Wonders
patch: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernelm=128978361700898w=2
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel
Hi Leenart,
Dhaval Giani pointed out to me that the same can be done from userspace
simply by creating a cgroup for each session in the cpu hierarchy. Turns
So a session's (as you're referring) initiator to would be the terminal
emulator process that has a virtual tty and systemd detect those
On 11/16/2010 09:14 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
This appears completely backwards to me. Attaching things like this to a
TTY is just wrong, because normally we don't have a single TTY around on
most graphical sessions.
The kernel doesn't really have a notion of what a session is (only the
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:14:33PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
The kernel doesn't really have a notion of what a session is (only the
audit subsystem kinda has), but if this grouping behaviour is supposed
to be bound to a session, then attaching it to a TTY is a pretty shitty
Hi Kyle,
I'm getting these while running
kyle.fedorapeople.org/kernel/2.6.35.8-59.xsched1/
http://kyle.fedorapeople.org/kernel/2.6.35.8-59.xsched1/
[ 234.580039] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
mm/slub.c:1701
[ 234.580048] in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4272,
On Tue, 16.11.10 19:52, Ilyes Gouta (ilyes.go...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi Leenart,
Dhaval Giani pointed out to me that the same can be done from userspace
simply by creating a cgroup for each session in the cpu hierarchy. Turns
So a session's (as you're referring) initiator to would be the
On Tue, 16.11.10 11:02, Josh Stone (jist...@redhat.com) wrote:
On 11/16/2010 09:14 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
This appears completely backwards to me. Attaching things like this to a
TTY is just wrong, because normally we don't have a single TTY around on
most graphical sessions.
On 11/16/2010 11:58 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
On 11/16/2010 11:39 AM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 04:58:11PM +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
Can we have this patch back ported into the current kernel for Fedora 14 and
possibly posted as an update? :)
Would be wonderful!
Try
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:09:49PM -0500, Genes MailLists wrote:
I am having these now :-(
Hi Gene,
Looks like the author hasn't run with CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP, as
its a problem with the patch against 2.6.37-rc2 as well (it's doing
kmalloc with irqs disabled.)
I'll let you know if
On 11/16/2010 08:34 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:09:49PM -0500, Genes MailLists wrote:
I am having these now :-(
Hi Gene,
Looks like the author hasn't run with CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP, as
its a problem with the patch against 2.6.37-rc2 as well (it's doing
21 matches
Mail list logo
