On Thursday 21 Apr 2011 6:52:29 am Dave Hylands wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:08 AM, mindentropy wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 Apr 2011 11:00:17 pm Dave Hylands wrote:
> >> I think that this is true for all of the architectures I've worked
> >> with (ARM, MIPS, x86). Some architectures
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011, Daniel Baluta wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> > static int __init bsr_init(void)
> > {
> > struct device_node *np;
> > dev_t bsr_dev = MKDEV(bsr_major, 0); <---
>
> You are right, this seems to be completely useless.
>
> Go on make a patch, compile and send it
Hi Robert,
> static int __init bsr_init(void)
> {
> struct device_node *np;
> dev_t bsr_dev = MKDEV(bsr_major, 0); <---
You are right, this seems to be completely useless.
Go on make a patch, compile and send it.
thanks,
Daniel.
i'm in the midst of updating some basic kernel documentation and i
just ran across something that makes me question my understanding of
the alloc_chrdev_region() kernel routine. as i've understood it all
this time, that routine is the preferred routine if you want to
allocate some character dev
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 16:41, luca ellero wrote:
> - but if I only create a directory and anything else, the "flush" is not
> executed immediately, so if I pull out the key, the directory just
> created disappear (which is not what I would expect).
looks like that's the job of "dirsync"...
--
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> Just in case you were interested, I am no longer based in
> Kitchener-Waterloo. I just made the move to Ottawa and am still
> unpacking.
Nice to see you back posting on the list, Rob! All the best in your new home.
Cheers
Julie
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Dave Hylands wrote:
> Hi Pankaj,
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Pankaj B wrote:
>> Hi,
>> At my end I was using tasklets to do some handling. But while
>> doing the handling the handler had to sleep, so I had to switch to
>> workqueues. I am scheduling a wo
Hi Pankaj,
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Pankaj B wrote:
> Hi,
> At my end I was using tasklets to do some handling. But while
> doing the handling the handler had to sleep, so I had to switch to
> workqueues. I am scheduling a work as follows:
> INIT_WORK(&event->work, do_handling_work);
> s
Hi!
On 17:44 Thu 21 Apr , Pankaj B wrote:
...
> INIT_WORK(&event->work, do_handling_work);
> schedule_work(&event->work);
> flush_scheduled_work();
>
> But the work never gets scheduled. I have put some printks in the
> do_handling_work() function. Creating workqueue and queueing
> the work t
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> Robert,
>
> I assume you know about OLS. (Ottawa Linux Symposium).
>
> I went 2 years ago. You should go. (or speak!)
>
> I don't recall the registration fee. I think it was waived for me
> since I was a speaker.
yup, i know about OLS, i went last
Robert,
I assume you know about OLS. (Ottawa Linux Symposium).
I went 2 years ago. You should go. (or speak!)
I don't recall the registration fee. I think it was waived for me
since I was a speaker.
Greg
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> Just in case you were i
Just in case you were interested, I am no longer based in
Kitchener-Waterloo. I just made the move to Ottawa and am still
unpacking. I'll be a regular at Ottawa Linux User Group meetings, and
if you want to chat offline about kernel or embedded stuff or Linux
training in general in the Ottawa
Hi,
At my end I was using tasklets to do some handling. But while
doing the handling the handler had to sleep, so I had to switch to
workqueues. I am scheduling a work as follows:
INIT_WORK(&event->work, do_handling_work);
schedule_work(&event->work);
flush_scheduled_work();
But the work never g
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Pankaj B wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Current INIT_WORK() macro takes just work_struct pointer and function
> > pointer.
> > In previous kernels there used to be a third parameter for data.
> > Is there a proper way t
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Pankaj B wrote:
> Hi,
> Current INIT_WORK() macro takes just work_struct pointer and function
> pointer.
> In previous kernels there used to be a third parameter for data.
> Is there a proper way to set data in work_struct?
>
Embed the work_struct into your structu
Hi,
Current INIT_WORK() macro takes just work_struct pointer and function
pointer.
In previous kernels there used to be a third parameter for data.
Is there a proper way to set data in work_struct?
Thanks
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@ker
Hi all,
I've read somewhere that the suggested mount option for USB key with FAT
filesystem is "-o flush" instead of "-o sync" (if you want to remove the
key safely, without executing umount or sync). sync option is quite
dangerous (and slow) for flash file-systems since it does an aggressive
f
17 matches
Mail list logo
