Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 16:05:38 Rusty Russell wrote:
On Wednesday 23 April 2008 06:29:14 Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 09:31:35 Rusty Russell wrote:
We may still regret not doing *everything* little-endian, but this
doesn't make
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 17:13:01 Anthony Liguori wrote:
Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 16:05:38 Rusty Russell wrote:
On Wednesday 23 April 2008 06:29:14 Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 09:31:35 Rusty Russell wrote:
We may still
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:19:29PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
3. As noted by Eric and also contained in private post from yesterday by
me: The cmp function needs to retrieve the value before
doing comparisons which is not done for the == of a and b.
I retrieved the value, which is
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:23:16PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Missing signoff by you.
I thought I had to signoff if I conributed with anything that could
resemble copyright? Given I only merged that patch, I can add an
Acked-by if you like, but merging this in my patchset was already an
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:24:21PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Reverts a part of an earlier patch. Why isnt this merged into 1 of 12?
To give zero regression risk to 1/12 when MMU_NOTIFIER=y or =n and the
mmu notifiers aren't registered by GRU or KVM. Keep in mind that the
whole point of my
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:22:55PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Looks like this is not complete. There are numerous .h files missing which
means that various structs are undefined (fs.h and rmap.h are needed
f.e.) which leads to surprises when dereferencing fields of these struct.
It
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:26:13PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Doing the right patch ordering would have avoided this patch and allow
better review.
I didn't actually write this patch myself. This did it instead:
s/anon_vma_lock/anon_vma_sem/
s/i_mmap_lock/i_mmap_sem/
s/locks/sems/
The only other change I did has been to move mmu_notifier_unregister
at the end of the patchset after getting more questions about its
reliability and I documented a bit the rmmod requirements for
-release. we'll think later if it makes sense to add it, nobody's
using it anyway.
XPMEM is
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:43:52AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:22:55PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Looks like this is not complete. There are numerous .h files missing which
means that various structs are undefined (fs.h and rmap.h are needed
f.e.) which
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:23:16PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Missing signoff by you.
I thought I had to signoff if I conributed with anything that could
resemble copyright? Given I only merged that patch, I can add an
Acked-by if you
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:24:21PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Reverts a part of an earlier patch. Why isnt this merged into 1 of 12?
To give zero regression risk to 1/12 when MMU_NOTIFIER=y or =n and the
mmu notifiers aren't registered by
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
The right patch ordering isn't necessarily the one that reduces the
total number of lines in the patchsets. The mmu-notifier-core is
already converged and can go in. The rest isn't converged at
all... nearly nobody commented on the other part (the
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
I'll send an update in any case to Andrew way before Saturday so
hopefully we'll finally get mmu-notifiers-core merged before next
week. Also I'm not updating my mmu-notifier-core patch anymore except
for strict bugfixes so don't worry about any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've looked around but can't seem to find these answers.
I'm using KVM to run multiple servers on the same hardware, but it seems
that most of the documentation written is for desktop use.
I'm currently running KVM-66 on a 2.6.24.4 kernel and using
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 17:13:01 Anthony Liguori wrote:
Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 16:05:38 Rusty Russell wrote:
On Wednesday 23 April 2008 06:29:14 Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 09:31:35 Rusty Russell wrote:
We may still
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 06:07:27PM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
The only other change I did has been to move mmu_notifier_unregister
at the end of the patchset after getting more questions about its
reliability and I documented a bit the rmmod requirements for
-release. we'll think later if it
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:51:16PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
Hello,
This is the latest and greatest version of the mmu notifier patch #v13.
FWIW, I have updated the GRU driver to use this patch (plus the fixeups).
No problems. AFAICT, everything works.
--- jack
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39:57PM -0600, Alberto Treviño wrote:
Thanks for all those who work on KVM. It is a wonderful product and I
have been very impressed with its features, performance, and the level
of activity in this project.
Back in February a bug was filed. I've been hit by
В санкт-Петербурге в перид с 19 по 21 мая будет проходить
информационный курс, посвященный логистике запасов.
--
Управление запасами в современной компании
--
19 - 21 мая 2008г.
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39:57PM -0600, Alberto Treviño wrote:
Thanks for all those who work on KVM. It is a wonderful product and I
have been very impressed with its features, performance, and the level
of activity in this project.
Back in February a bug was
* On Wednesday 23 Apr 2008 05:20:03 Stuart Sheldon wrote:
I've looked around but can't seem to find these answers.
I'm using KVM to run multiple servers on the same hardware, but it seems
that most of the documentation written is for desktop use.
I'm currently running KVM-66 on a 2.6.24.4
101 - 121 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
