Oren Laadan wrote:
Hi,
Just got back from 3 weeks with practically no internet, and I see
that I missed a big party !
Trying to catch up with what's been said so far --
[...]
- Will any of this involve non-trivial serialisation of kernel
objects? If so, that's getting into the
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:28 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
For extra marks:
- Will any of this involve non-trivial serialisation of kernel
objects? If so, that's getting into the
unacceptably-expensive-to-maintain space, I suspect.
We have some structures that are certainly
* Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
Similar to the way in which perfectly correct and normal kernel
sometimes has to be changed because it unexpectedly upsets the -rt
patch.
Actually, regarding -rt, we try to keep that in two buckets:
1) Normal kernel code works but is unclean
On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:08:02 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote:
* Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
Similar to the way in which perfectly correct and normal kernel
sometimes has to be changed because it unexpectedly upsets the -rt
patch.
Actually, regarding -rt, we
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:11:22 -0800
Dave Hansen d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
...
- In bullet-point form, what features are missing, and should be added?
* support for more architectures than i386
* file descriptors:
* sockets (network, AF_UNIX, etc...)
* devices files
*
Quoting Dave Hansen (d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
Patch 12/14 is supposed to address this *concept*. But, it hasn't been
carried through so that it currently works. My expectation was that we
would go through and add things over time. I'll go make sure I push it
to the point that it actually
On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 12:07 -0500, Oren Laadan wrote:
Checkpoint-restart (c/r): a couple of fixes in preparation for 64bit
architectures, and a couple of fixes for bugss (comments from Serge
Hallyn, Sudakvev Bhattiprolu and Nathan Lynch). Updated and tested
against v2.6.28.
Aiming for -mm.
