On 23 Mar 2001, Kevin Buhr wrote:
> Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Mike, would you like to try out the following (untested) patch against
> > > vanilla ac20 to see if it does the trick?
> >
> > Yes, that fixed it.
>
> Great! Can you test one more configuration, please? I
"James A. Sutherland" wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Guest section DW wrote:
> > (I think 2.4.0.)
> >
> > Clearly, Linux cannot be reliable if any process can be killed
> > at any moment.
>
> What on earth did you expect to happen when the process exceeded the
> machine's capabilities? Using more
Horst von Brand wrote:
>
> "Christian Bodmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I can't say I understand the whole MM system, however the random killing
> > of processes seems like a rather unfortunate solution to the problem. If
> > someone has a spare minute, maybe they could explain to me why
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> Also as a note, what we are doing is keeping our rootfs on flash as a
>> tar.gz and reading it and mounting it on a ramfs in the /linuxrc
>> before doing a pivot_root. To summarize,
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> Hmm... "if ( freemem < (size_of_mallocing_process / 20) ) fail_to_allocate;"
>
> Seems like a reasonable soft limit - processes which have already got
> lots of RAM can probably stand not to have that little bit more and
> can be curbed more
:: Your ideas sound really good, would you have the time to implement
:: them for 2.4 ?
2.4 or 2.5?
-- Juha
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > things correctly they have enhanced Wake-on-LAN to allow you to do
> > things like reset the machine, update the BIOS and such by sending
> > magic packets which are interpreted by the network card. Or maybe I am
>
> Normally 'sending magic packets
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Guest section DW wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:56:23AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > > > Feel free to write better-working code.
> > >
> > > I don't get paid for it and I'm not idling through my days...
> >
> >
>
Linus,
The patch below updates the MM code for PowerPC to correspond with the
recent generic MM changes. The patch is against 2.4.3-pre7, and it
affects only arch/ppc/mm/init.c, include/asm-ppc/pgalloc.h, and
include/asm-ppc/semaphore.h.
The changes to semaphore.h are only necessary because
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
> When I ported your OOM killer to 2.2.x and integrated it into the
> 'reserved root memory' [*] patch, during intensive testing I found two
> cases when init was killed. It happened on low-end machines and when
> OOM killer wasn't triggered so
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, george anzinger wrote:
> What happens if you just make swap VERY large? Does the system thrash
> it self to a virtual standstill?
It does. I need to implement load control code (so we suspend
processes in turn to keep the load low enough so we can avoid
thrashing).
> Is
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 23:59:09 +0100, J . A . Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 03.23 Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>> I agree. I'd much prefer that syntax also.
>>
>> Or just remove the "default:" altogether, when it doesn't make any
>> difference.
>>
>
> Well, at last some sense. The
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Kevin Buhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>The results speak for themselves:
>
>CVS gcc 3.0: Debian gcc 2.95.3: RedHat gcc 2.96:
>
>real16m8.423s real8m2.417s real12m24.939s
>user15m23.710suser
> Tom Sightler wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I saw a discussion on this list about this problem earlier, but could
not
> > find that it had actually been resolved.
>
> That was me :) and no, it doesn't work. Jeff Garzik asked me to enable
> a couple debug #defines in serial.c, apply patches to
Kevin Buhr wrote:
> Jakob Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Try compiling something like Qt/KDE/gtk-- which are really heavy on
> > templates (with all the benefits and drawbacks of that).
>
> Okay, I just compiled gtk-- 1.0.3 (with CFLAGS = "-O2 -g") under three
> versions of GCC
Alan Cox wrote:
> 2.4.2-ac24
Is DRI still hosed?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan/2.4/
>
> Intermediate diffs are available from
>
> http://www.bzimage.org
>
> (Note that the cmsfs port to 2.4 is a work in progress)
>
> 2.4.2-ac24
> o
From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > On the ThinkPad 600E (at least), we get a Power Status Change APM event.
>
> Any reason we couldn't recalibrate the bogomips on a power status change,
> at least for laptops we know appear to need it (I can make the DMI code look
> for matches there..)
,--- Forwarded message (begin)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Prevent OOM from killing init
From: Jonathan Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 20:45:43 -0500
>Hmm... "if ( freemem < (size_of_mallocing_process / 20) ) fail_to_allocate;"
Not sure this is that reasonable on
Hi together,
seems like a hot discussion going on, but I couldn't resist and would like to
throw in my $0.02.
Besides misunderstandings and general displeasure, some very interesting
facts have shown up in the discussion (oh, yeah), which I'd like to know more
about, and just extend them with a
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
> Nonsense hodgepodge. See and/or mesaure the impact. I sent numbers in my
> former email. You also missed non-overcommit must be _optional_ [i.e.
> you wouldn't be forced to use it ;)]. Yes, there are users and
> enterprises who require it and
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> No, ulimit does not work. (But it helps a little.)
no, not perfect, i very much agree. but in daily usage it reduces
chance of OOM to close to 0.
> No, /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory does not work.
that's because it disables the very rough
>Hmm... "if ( freemem < (size_of_mallocing_process / 20) ) fail_to_allocate;"
>
>Seems like a reasonable soft limit - processes which have already got lots
>of RAM can probably stand not to have that little bit more and can be
>curbed more quickly. Processes with less probably don't deserve to
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 19:44:16 -0500 (EST),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (root) wrote:
>Warning (compare_maps): ksyms_base symbol __VERSIONED_SYMBOL(shmem_file_setup) not
>found in System.map. Ignoring ksyms_base entry
Against 2.4.2-ac23 to remove above warning.
Index: 2.45/mm/Makefile
---
Thanks to all for their advice on this problem. So far I've tried
hdparm flags six ways from sunday to no effect, but I have yet to
try suggestions such as those below. Alas I have to set aside this
problem for the next few weeks.
In the mean time, I note that the linux machines at my Lab are
I heard about this issue, and just joined the mailing list. I am
working on a driver similar to the bonding driver and am getting the
same results.
If I do the following:
ifconfig fte0 10.0.0.2 up
ifenslave fte0 eth1
ifenslave fte0 eth2
ifconfig fte0 down
ifconfig eth1
I get a kernel panic. I
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan/2.4/
Intermediate diffs are available from
http://www.bzimage.org
(Note that the cmsfs port to 2.4 is a work in progress)
2.4.2-ac24
o Fix build bug with tsc in ac23 (me)
At 04:31 PM 3/23/01 -0800, you wrote:
>This has nothing to do with fastpathing and object code optimization. C
>doesn't have exception handling, so you either have to remember to undo
>allocations etc. in failure cases all through the code, or you stick your
>undo code at the end of the function
Micro patchlet :-)
In wandering around the kernel recently, I found that
contains stale comments at the head of the file relating to the old static
timers which were deleted for 2.4.
So, here's a trivial patch to try to bring things back in sync.
Regards,
Tim
--- timer.h.2.4.2 Fri Mar
> It was actually worse than that. Grab your copy of "Lions", and check lines
> 4375-4377 in function xswap(). A failure to allocate space in the swapmap
> caused a panic. Same problem in xalloc().
[no Lions nearby; somewhere I still have the printout but am
too lazy to search; I also have the
Hmmm...
you don't really give enough information to make much of a guess.
I'd do the following:
Grab at least 2.2.18, or even better, get Alan's 2.2.19pre (which is almost
2.2.19 now, I believe), and build and install that kernel.
Now, if you run into the same problems, record the crash details,
On 03.24 Andrew Morton wrote:
> "J . A . Magallon" wrote:
> >
> > The same is with that ugly out: at the end
> > of the function. Just change all that 'goto out' for a return.
>
> Oh no, no, no. Please, no.
>
> Multiple return statements are a maintenance nightmare.
>
Well, I do not want
Hi,
Yet another one. This time with all the traceback entries...
Ed
ksymoops 2.3.7 on i586 2.4.2-ac22. Options used
-V (default)
-k 20010323183444.ksyms (specified)
-l 20010323183444.modules (specified)
-o /lib/modules/2.4.2-ac22/ (default)
-m
>
i have the source files for compiling the module for 2.2 kernels but i
can't get the module to work in 2.4
is anyone programming a 2.4 driver/module ?
or can someone help me to convert the existing source code to a working 2.4
kernelmodule (or better in the kernel)
Erik
-
To unsubscribe from
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 06:38:37PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > infinite storage. After all, earlier Unix flavours did not need
> > an OOM killer either, and my editor was not killed under Unix V6
> > on 64k when I started some other process.
>
> You were lucky. Its quite possible for V6 to kill
They're sharing an IRQ because they're attached to the same interrupt line
on the motherboard. Nothing you can do in software is ever going to change
this. For most BX chipset motherboards I've seen, the AGP slot shares the
same interrupt as the first (i.e. physically closest) PCI slot. If you
"J . A . Magallon" wrote:
>
> The same is with that ugly out: at the end
> of the function. Just change all that 'goto out' for a return.
Oh no, no, no. Please, no.
Multiple return statements are a maintenance nightmare.
Go back and look at the "checker" reports. Think about them.
-
-
To
I'm having a similar problem with the onboard network card of a Sony
Vaio Laptop. I haven't tracked it down as far as you can; how can I
confirm its the same problem as yours?
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 09:34:36AM -0800, Jun Sun wrote:
> christophe barbe wrote:
> >
> > Which kernel are you using.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 02:39:07PM -0500, Michael Bacarella wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:51:11PM -0500, Doug McNaught wrote:
> > Is there an alternative to BIND that's free software? Never seen
> > one.
>
> Have a look at djbdns.
I use djbdns myself and am very happy with it, but the
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:59:09PM +0100, J . A . Magallon wrote:
>
> On 03.23 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > I agree. I'd much prefer that syntax also.
> >
> > Or just remove the "default:" altogether, when it doesn't make any
> > difference.
> >
>
> Well, at last some sense. The same is
Hi,
The Kernel Janitor's Project grew out of our search for things to help in
the development of the Linux kernel, and learning from other patches
submitted by more experienced people, we saw that some of these patches
indicated error patterns that could exist in other parts of the kernel, we
I have been using 2.4.0-ac20 for about a week, and today suddenly got a slew of
messages:
EXT2-fs error (device ide0(3,1)): ext2_new_block: Free blocks count corrupted for
block group 43
while copying the mozilla tree (a great way to stress out a filesystem! :)). This is
the first such
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Tim Wright wrote:
> Netscape 4 has some very nasty habits like suddenly consuming ~80MB of memory.
> Disabling java support seems to eradicate most occurences of this particularly
> obnoxious behaviour. Under these circumstances, the OOM killer is doing exactly
> the right
Hi,
I am not a member of either of these lists and would appreciate if you could send your
replies to me personally.
Now the problem:
I have an IBM Netfinity X330 server. Dual Processor (PIII 800). I compiled kernel
2.2.14 with SMP support. NFS was however compiled as a module.
Now the
>[to various people]
>
>No, ulimit does not work. (But it helps a little.)
>No, /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory does not work.
Entirely correct. ulimit certainly makes it much harder for a single
runaway process to take down important parts of the system - now why
doesn't $(MAJOR_DISTRO_VENDOR)
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Richard Jerrell wrote:
> > Your idea is nice, but the patch lacks a few things:
> >
> > - SMP locking, what if some other process faults in this page
> > between the atomic_read of the page count and the test later?
>
> It can't happen. free_pte is called with the
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:38:00AM +0100, J . A . Magallon wrote:
> Is there a non-written standard for coding that asm's ?
> For example:
> " adcl 12(%1), %0\n"
> "1:adcl 16(%1), %0\n"
> " lea 4(%1), %1\n"
>
> or
>
> "adcl 12(%1), %0\n\t"
^[1]
> "1: adcl
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 05:26:22PM +, James A. Sutherland wrote:
> > Clearly, Linux cannot be reliable if any process can be killed
> > at any moment.
>
> What on earth did you expect to happen when the process exceeded the
> machine's capabilities? Using more than all the resources fails.
Hello Garloff-san,
Actually, a good question.
I have been trying to find the details of the verification tool from stanford
but to no avail.
Maybe we should ask the posters from the Stanford directly.
(Oops. I thought I posted this to linux-scsi, but did I post
linux-kernel instead?
Netscape 4 has some very nasty habits like suddenly consuming ~80MB of memory.
Disabling java support seems to eradicate most occurences of this particularly
obnoxious behaviour. Under these circumstances, the OOM killer is doing exactly
the right thing i.e. killing a runaway app.
Tim
On Fri,
Guest section DW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 07:50:25AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> > > Mar 23 11:48:49 mette kernel: Out of Memory: Killed process 2019 (emacs).
> > > Mar 23 11:48:49 mette kernel: Out of Memory: Killed process 1407 (emacs).
> > > Mar 23
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > You don't beleve me if I tell you: DOS extender and JVM (Java Virtual
> > Machine)
>
> The JVM doesnt actually. The JVM will itself spontaenously explode in real
> life when out of memory. Maybe the JVM on a DOS extender 8)
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> [to various people]
>
> No, ulimit does not work. (But it helps a little.)
> No, /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory does not work.
>
> [to Alan]
>
> > Nobody feels its very important because nobody has implemented it.
>
> Yes, that is the right response.
> What can
Jonathan Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >It would make much sense to make the oom killer
> >leave not just root processes alone but processes belonging to a UID
> >lower
> >then a certain value as well (500). This would be:
> >
> >1. Easly managable by the admin. Just let oracle/www and
[to various people]
No, ulimit does not work. (But it helps a little.)
No, /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory does not work.
[to Alan]
> Nobody feels its very important because nobody has implemented it.
Yes, that is the right response.
What can one say? One can only do.
Andries
-
To
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:12:06AM +, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Lawrence Walton wrote:
> >
> > Hello all
> > 2.4.2-ac21 seems to have a couple problems.
> > ...
> >
> > Mar 22 15:15:55 the-penguin kernel: NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out
> > ...
> > 00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA
Tom Sightler wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I saw a discussion on this list about this problem earlier, but could not
> find that it had actually been resolved.
That was me :) and no, it doesn't work. Jeff Garzik asked me to enable
a couple debug #defines in serial.c, apply patches to serial.c and
Hi,
Got this with ac22...
ksymoops 2.3.7 on i586 2.4.2-ac22. Options used
-V (default)
-k /var/log/ksymoops/20010323122909.ksyms (specified)
-l /var/log/ksymoops/20010323122909.modules (specified)
-o /lib/modules/2.4.2-ac22/ (default)
-m /boot/System.map-2.4.2-ac22
On 03.23 Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> I agree. I'd much prefer that syntax also.
>
> Or just remove the "default:" altogether, when it doesn't make any
> difference.
>
Well, at last some sense. The same is with that ugly out: at the end
of the function. Just change all that 'goto out' for a
> Andy Kellner (from ConnectCom Solutions formerly
> known as Advansys) and Bob Frey (former maintainer)
> working in concert have posted several "3.3x" versions
> of the advansys driver to the linux-scsi list. Despite
I don't believe Linus reads linux-scsi. I only glance at it occasionally.
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> __find_get_page has I think a misleading comment ?
Ehh..
I only said the _naming_ makes sense. [ Wild hand-waving ]
I suspect that what happened was that we split off the functions (one to
just get the page, one to lock it), and the comment that was
> If you don't want to sleep, you need to use one of the wrappers for
> "__find_page_nolock()". Something like "find_get_page()", which only
> "gets" the page.
* a rather lightweight function, finding and getting a reference to a
* hashed page atomically, waiting for it if it's locked.
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Bill Wendling wrote:
> Also sprach Alan Cox:
>
> } > - default:
> } > + default:;
> }
> } Agree - done
> }
> This kind of coding makes me want to cry. What's so wrong with:
>
> default:
> break;
>
> instead? The ';' is hard to notice and
I agree. I'd
Alan Cox writes:
> Umm find_lock_page doesnt sleep does it ?
It does lock_page, which sleeps to get the lock if necessary.
Later,
David S. Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
Otto Wyss wrote:
> > I had a similar experience:
> > X crashed , hosing the console , so I could not initiate
> > a proper shutdown.
> >
> > Here I must note that the response you got on linux-kernel is
> > shameful.
> >
> Thanks, but I expected it a little bit. All around Linux is centered
>
> > > + page = find_lock_page(mapping, idx);
> > >
> > > Ehh.. Sleeping with the spin-lock held? Sounds like a truly bad idea.
> >
> > Umm find_lock_page doesnt sleep does it ?
>
> It certainly does. find_lock_page() -> __find_lock_page() -> lock_page() ->
> -> __lock_page() ->
Also sprach Alan Cox:
} > - default:
} > + default:;
}
} Agree - done
}
This kind of coding makes me want to cry. What's so wrong with:
default:
break;
instead? The ';' is hard to notice and, if people don't leave the
"default:" at the end, then bad things
icabod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've noticed a small problem that hinders me
> from updatingmy system to the new 2.4 kernels.
> I'm using a PowerMac with a Advansys SCSI 3940UW
> card in it running my drives. I've noticed that
> since the 2.4 kernel series the advanasys drivers
> version
> After upgrading to latest 2.4.2-ac23 (that includes latest changes
> from 2.4.3-pre6) X doesn't start anymore. It was working perfectly for
> 2.4.2-ac20. I'm using DRI CVS, but it seems to have little to do with DRI
> as disabling completely DRI doesn't help.
DRI will not work with ac23
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > and rely on it. You might find you need a few Gbytes of swap just to
> > > boot
> > Seems a bit exaggeration ;) Here are numbers,
> NetBSD is if I remember rightly still using a.out library styles.
No, it uses ELF today, moreover the numbers were from
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> > >
> > > The patch below is for two races in sysV shared memory.
> >
> > + spin_lock (>lock);
> > +
> > + /* The shmem_swp_entry() call may have blocked, and
> > +*
Marcus Meissner wrote:
>> I have a problem with the 2.4 series kernel running on a number of
>> Compaq ProLiant DL360 servers. The 2.2.x kernels and 2.4.0 work fine,
>> however from 2.4.1 onwards the boxes just hang at the following position
>> on bootup:
>
>> Partition check:
>> ida/c0d0:
>
>>
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > + spin_lock (>lock);
> > +
> > + /* The shmem_swp_entry() call may have blocked, and
> > +* shmem_writepage may have been moving a page between the page
> > +* cache and swap cache. We need to recheck
> > and rely on it. You might find you need a few Gbytes of swap just to
> > boot
>
> Seems a bit exaggeration ;) Here are numbers,
NetBSD is if I remember rightly still using a.out library styles.
> 6-50% more VM and the performance hit also isn't so bad as it's thought
> (Eduardo Horvath
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> >
> > The patch below is for two races in sysV shared memory.
>
> + spin_lock (>lock);
> +
> + /* The shmem_swp_entry() call may have blocked, and
> +* shmem_writepage may have been moving a page
> Any chance of anyone elaborating on any RAWIO flaws?
>
> *Seems* to work fine with:
> - 2.4.2 (inc Dave Miller's zero copy patch)
> - qlogic fc driver & qla2200
> - PIII
> - Seagate ST39103fc drives in a JBOD
>
> I really need to know any *specific* issues with RAWIO.
All I know is that
> You don't beleve me if I tell you: DOS extender and JVM (Java Virtual
> Machine)
The JVM doesnt actually. The JVM will itself spontaenously explode in real
life when out of memory. Maybe the JVM on a DOS extender 8)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Michael Bacarella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:51:11PM -0500, Doug McNaught wrote:
>>
>> Is there an alternative to BIND that's free software? Never seen
>> one.
> Have a look at djbdns.
> http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html
It is NOT free software.
--
Debian GNU/Linux
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
> > About the "use resource limits!". Yes, this is one solution. The
> > *expensive* solution (admin time, worse resource utilization, etc).
Thanks for cutting out relevant parts that said how to increase
What happens if you just make swap VERY large? Does the system thrash
it self to a virtual standstill? Is this a possible answer? Supposedly
you could then sneak in and blow away the bad guys manually ...
George
Paul Jakma wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
>
> >
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 2.4.2-ac23
> ...
> o Fix i386 #ifdef bug with notsc disable (Anton Blanchard)
> ...
>
>
> This change has broken the compile for me (my .config is attached):
>
> gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/home/bunk/linux/linux/include -Wall
> -Wstrict-prototypes
> I don't know why the comparision is made though, they are used for two
> completely different things... ramfs is for temporary file storage, cramfs
> is for immutable files stored on flash. Each by itself is quite optimal
> for what it's designed for, isn't it ?
Exactly. My mistake earlier to
Hi,
I'm experiencing problems with an rtl8029-nic. The computer acts as a
multicast-client receiving a disk-image from a server. That transfer went
fine during the first 1.5 gb and then the machine stopped responding.
I tried to ping it, but got no answer. On the machine i see that the
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > 1. RAMFS is just more stable in terms of less complexity, less bugs reported
> > over the time, etc.
> > 2. RAMFS is a fairly robust filesystem and all features required as far as I can
> > tell.
Ok, ramfs is really simple, but heck, cramfs is
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:30:46 -0800 (PST), Alan Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He found out what happens when you mix Penguin bars and Penguin Mints and
> he has been in detox since. ];>
Wouldn't that be de-tux, though? :-)
Ion
--
It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a
Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mike, would you like to try out the following (untested) patch against
> > vanilla ac20 to see if it does the trick?
>
> Yes, that fixed it.
Great! Can you test one more configuration, please? I can't test it
properly with my SMP motherboard.
>The main point is letting malloc fail when the memory cannot be
>guaranteed.
If I read various things correctly, malloc() is supposed to fail as you
would expect if /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory is 0. This is the case on
my RH 6.2 box, dunno about yours. I can write a simple test program
> I am afraid that I do not know how to change my partition type. I can confirm.
>however, that the BIOS is set to Auto / LBA and that BIOS confirms UDMA 5 is set (and
>cannot be set unless the correct cabling is detected).
[tim@abit tim]# fdisk /dev/hdc
Command (m for help): t
Partition
SodaPop wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> > SodaPop wrote:
> > >
> > > Rik, is there any way we could get a /proc entry for this, so that one
> > > could do something like:
> >
> > I will respond; NO there is no way for security reasons this is not a
> > good idea.
> >
>
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Szabolcs Szakacsits wrote:
> About the "use resource limits!". Yes, this is one solution. The
> *expensive* solution (admin time, worse resource utilization, etc).
traditional user limits have worse resource utilisation? think what
kind of utilisation a guaranteed
>I am trying to compile the 2.4.3-pre6 linux kernel and it is failing
>because it cannot find the "db.h" header file.
Please upgrade to the latest aic7xxx driver. Patches are available
here:
http://people.freebsd.org/~gibbs/linux/
That code will not attempt to build the firmware unless you
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Nigel's "traverse the run queue and mark the preempted" solution is
> actually pretty nice, and cheap. Since the runqueue lock is grabbed,
> it doesn't require icky atomic ops, either.
You'd have to mark both the preempted tasks, and the tasks
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 07:35:49PM +0100, Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> My code here is quite template heavy, and I suspect that's what's triggering
> it. In fact, I can't compile our development code with optimization, because
> GCC runs out of memory (it only allocates some 300-500 MB, but each
I've noticed a small problem that hinders me from updatingmy system to the
new 2.4 kernels. I'm using a PowerMac with a Advansys SCSI 3940UW card in
it running my drives. I've noticed that since the 2.4 kernel series the
advanasys driver s version 3.2M and the driver version that works for me
and
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Well, in that case you'll have to live with the current OOM
> killer. Martin wrote down a pretty detailed description of
> what's wrong with my algorithm, if it really bothers him he
> should be able to come up with something better.
>
> Personally, I
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 10:31:49AM -0800, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Bob Lorenzini wrote:
> > I'm annoyed when persons post virus alerts to unrelated lists but this
> > is a serious threat. If your offended flame away.
> This should be a wake up call... distributions need to
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Guest section DW wrote:
> But yes, I am complaining because Linux by default is unreliable.
no, your distribution is unreliable by default.
> I strongly prefer a system that is reliable by default,
> and I'll leave it to others to run it in an unreliable mode.
currently,
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> SodaPop wrote:
> >
> > Rik, is there any way we could get a /proc entry for this, so that one
> > could do something like:
>
> I will respond; NO there is no way for security reasons this is not a
> good idea.
>
> > cat /proc/oom-kill-scores | sort +3
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I'm trying to use Stephen Tweedie's raw device support to access disks
> > attached to a Qlogic ISP 1040/B controller and kernel oopses.
>
> 2.2 or 2.4 ?
2.4.2
> > Has anyone used the raw device with qlogicisp driver? Does anyone have any
> > interest
Hi,
Here are updated patches getting usb-ohci and usb-uhci to
behave on an ac20 kernel with slab debugging enabled.
It uses the pci_pool API, discussed earlier.
- pcipool-0323.patch ... adds pci_pool apis to ;
bugfixes vs what I sent to linux-usb-devel yesterday
- ohci-0323.patch ...
1 - 100 of 470 matches
Mail list logo
