On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Pietro Paolini pulsarpie...@aol.com wrote:
Did you achieve in compile and run the 1.0 Linux kernel on your system ? I am
really curios !
Best Regards
Pietro .
I haven't tested that by myself. IIRC I only tried to run the provided
disk image inside Qemu,
On 11 April 2013 09:34, Mulyadi Santosa mulyadi.sant...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Pietro Paolini pulsarpie...@aol.com wrote:
Did you achieve in compile and run the 1.0 Linux kernel on your system ? I
am really curios !
Best Regards
Pietro .
I haven't tested that
neha naik nehanai...@gmail.com writes:
Nobody has replied to my query here. So i am just wondering if there is
a forum for block device driver where i can post my query.
Please tell me if there is any such forum.
The get_maintainer script will tell you such things. Try running for
example
Hi, all,
It seems that Intel will publish a nice chip called Bay Trail (or plus,
I don't quick sure, which is for smartphones/tablets, also some lower
ends of laptops in the future). It was said publically that Intel will
support Linux platform on that chip. I just want to know something from
the
Hi,
I am calling the merge function of the block device driver below me(since
mine is only pass through). Does this not work?
When i tried seeing what read requests were coming then i saw that when i
issue dd with count=1 it retrieves 4 pages,
so i tried with 'direct' flag. But even with direct
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:08:21 +0800, Peter Xu said:
Hi, all,
It seems that Intel will publish a nice chip called Bay Trail (or plus,
I don't quick sure, which is for smartphones/tablets, also some lower
ends of laptops in the future). It was said publically that Intel will
support Linux
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:08:21 +0800, Peter Xu said:
Hi, all,
It seems that Intel will publish a nice chip called Bay Trail (or plus,
I don't quick sure, which is for smartphones/tablets, also some lower
ends of laptops in the
so you mean direct I/O read of your passthrough device is lower than
direct I/O read of lvm?
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 8:39 PM, neha naik nehanai...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am calling the merge function of the block device driver below me(since
mine is only pass through). Does this not work?
Yes. Interestingly my direct write i/o performance is better than my direct
read i/o performance for my passthrough device... And that doesn't make any
kind of sense to me.
pdev0 = pass through device on top of lvm
root@voffice-base:/home/neha/sbd# time dd if=/dev/pdev0 of=/dev/null
bs=4096
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 2:50 PM, neha naik nehanai...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. Interestingly my direct write i/o performance is better than my direct
read i/o performance for my passthrough device... And that doesn't make any
kind of sense to me.
pdev0 = pass through device on top of lvm
10 matches
Mail list logo
