Re: [PATCH v3 21/22] netoops: Add user-programmable boot_id

2010-12-14 Thread Matt Mackall
On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 13:30 -0800, Mike Waychison wrote: Add support for letting userland define a 32bit boot id. This is useful for users to be able to correlate netoops reports to specific boot instances offline. This sounds a lot like the pre-existing /proc/sys/kernel/random/boot_id that's

Re: [PATCH v3 21/22] netoops: Add user-programmable boot_id

2010-12-14 Thread Matt Mackall
On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 13:59 -0800, Mike Waychison wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Matt Mackall m...@selenic.com wrote: On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 13:30 -0800, Mike Waychison wrote: Add support for letting userland define a 32bit boot id. This is useful for users to be able to correlate

Re: [PATCH v3 21/22] netoops: Add user-programmable boot_id

2010-12-14 Thread Matt Mackall
On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 14:33 -0800, Mike Waychison wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Matt Mackall m...@selenic.com wrote: On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 13:59 -0800, Mike Waychison wrote: On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Matt Mackall m...@selenic.com wrote: On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 13:30 -0800

Re: [PATCH v2 00/23] netoops support

2010-11-08 Thread Matt Mackall
: Introduce netpoll_target configs 13 - netconsole: Move setting of default ports. 14 - netpoll: Move target code into netpoll_targets.c This much of your set looks very nice to me, but I'd like to get some more eyeballs on the first four. Dave? Acked-by: Matt Mackall m...@selenic.com

Re: [PATCH v1 00/12] netoops support

2010-11-03 Thread Matt Mackall
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 13:29 -0700, Mike Waychison wrote: Mike Waychison wrote: FWIW, another semantic difference between netconsole and netoops (that I had missed in the last email) is filtering: we really do want to get the whole log when a crash happens, debug messages and all.

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Remove fasync() BKL usage, take 3325

2009-01-22 Thread Matt Mackall
On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 21:31 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:15:00 -0700 Jonathan Corbet cor...@lwn.net wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:51:04 -0800 Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: OK, replacing a lock_kernel() with a spin_lock(global_lock) is pretty

Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Add /proc/mempool to display mempool usage

2008-12-01 Thread Matt Mackall
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:12 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:49:07 -0800 Greg KH wrote: On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 12:42:07AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 06:44:49PM +0100, Remi Colinet wrote: This patch add a new /proc/mempool file in order to

Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Add /proc/mempool to display mempool usage

2008-12-01 Thread Matt Mackall
On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 00:02 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: Hi Linus, On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote: Hmm, I thought Documentation/ABI/ was supposed to tell us what's an ABI you can depend on and what's not. I mean, you shouldn't be depending on anything but the interfaces documented