Hello everyone,
I hope this question is not too basic for the intended audience. I have
a server with an Intel SE7210TP1-E motherboard[1] and a single 3.4GHz P4
CPU[2]. I am currently running a vanilla 2.6.21.5 kernel with SMP/HT.
Two patches are applied: one is a SATA driver[3] and the other
Ram Pai wrote:
>
> Peter, I am not working on it currently. But i am interested in getting
> it done. I have the seed set of patches which had Al Viro's ideas
> incorporated. Infact those patches were sent on lkml 2 months back.
> Shall we start with those patches?
>
Okay, so what I see in your
On Wed, Jun 20, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> It's already annoying that they appear on x86 now -- that's for the 3button
> emulation needed on x86 macs -- but at least don't make them default.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> drivers/macintosh/Kconfig |2 +-
> 1 file ch
[Jesper Juhl - Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 07:20:33PM +0200]
| From: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Cc: LKML
| Subject: Re: [PATCH] bracing the loop in kernel/softirq.c
| Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:20:33 +0200
|
> On 21/06/07, Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On 070621 19:26, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:29:17PM +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > On 070621 18:19, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Johannes Schlumberger wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Hi
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
>
> A while ago I showed that spinlocks were a lot more fair when doing
> unlock with the xchg instruction on x86. Probably the arbitration is all
> screwed up because we use a mov instruction, which while atomic is not
> locked.
No, the cache line arbit
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 19:25 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> On 070621 19:21, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > > Modified task_struct to hold a 'signed flag' which is set on exec(),
> > > inherited
> > > on fork(
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 16:33 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> Having read the RSS and Pagecache controllers some things bothered me.
>>>
>>> - the duplication of much of the reclaim data (not code)
>>>and the size increase as a result thereof.
>>>
When trying manually to get the on-board broadcom adapter working I get
this:
Jun 21 16:50:47 urpdev1 kernel: [ 184.528092] Broadcom NetXtreme II
Gigabit Ethernet Driver bnx2 v1.4.45 (September 29, 2006)
Jun 21 16:50:47 urpdev1 kernel: [ 184.539831] ACPI: PCI Interrupt
:05:00.0[A] -> GSI 16
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 04:07:57PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
I do not say that the BIOS is doing anything (legally) wrong. The
wrong act is distributing the binary kernel image without distributing
complete source code for it.
So how about this
On 070621 19:21, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> > Modified task_struct to hold a 'signed flag' which is set on exec(),
> > inherited
> > on fork() and checked during exec before giving the new process suid/sgid
> > pri
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:07:12AM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Ingo, responding to Srivatsa:
> > > Or maybe allow movement if it
> > > doesn't result in changing kernel-threads's cpu affinity.
> >
> > yeah, i'd agree ..
>
> Good point. I'd agree too.
Yeah .."allow movement if it doesn't resul
Hi Benedikt,
On 6/21/07, Benedikt Spranger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fix the reporting order of BTN_TOUCH to coordinates first, then
BTN_TOUCH. This simplifies touchscreen event dispatcher. The userspace
should count on the kernel and get BTN_TOUCH-events with updated
coordinates.
Why is thi
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:45:34PM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:25:28AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > > On Sat, May 05, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >
> > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21/2.6.
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 09:29 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ram Pai wrote:
> >
> > Peter, I am not working on it currently. But i am interested in getting
> > it done. I have the seed set of patches which had Al Viro's ideas
> > incorporated. Infact those patches were sent on lkml 2 months back.
>
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:29:17PM +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> On 070621 18:19, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Johannes Schlumberger wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> >
> > Hi Johannes,
> >
> > > We (two students of CS) built a system for signi
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 18:02 +0200, Alexander Wuerstlein wrote:
> Modified task_struct to hold a 'signed flag' which is set on exec(), inherited
> on fork() and checked during exec before giving the new process suid/sgid
> privileges.
>
do you also check the signature of glibc and every other sh
On 21/06/07, Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Jesper Juhl - Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 11:01:44PM +0200]
| From: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: Cyrill Gorcunov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Cc: LKML
| Subject: Re: [PATCH] bracing the loop in kernel/softirq.c
| Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:01:44
This is a Chinese translated version of
Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt. Hope this document will be hepful.
---
Documentation/zh_CN/stable_api_nonsense.txt | 157
+++
1 files changed, 157 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/zh_CN/stable_
Jeremy,
Could you please add the ELF architecture-magic number for Xtensa (94)
when you finally submit this patch?
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
This patch cleans up the ELF headers and their users. It does several
related things:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/linux/elf-const.h
@@ -0,0 +1,222 @@
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 04:07:57PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> I do not say that the BIOS is doing anything (legally) wrong. The
> wrong act is distributing the binary kernel image without distributing
> complete source code for it.
So how about this idea then:
Tivo builds a kernel for their b
Hello.
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
[PATCH] ide: use PIO/MMIO operations directly where possible
This results in smaller/faster/simpler code and allows future optimizations.
Also remove no longer needed ide[_mm]_{inl,outl}() and ide_hwif_t.{INL,OUTL}.
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierk
Ingo, responding to Srivatsa:
> > Or maybe allow movement if it
> > doesn't result in changing kernel-threads's cpu affinity.
>
> yeah, i'd agree ..
Good point. I'd agree too.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
While trying to copy a file from my cell phone to a ext3 partition over
bluetooth ( with gnome-vfs-obexftp 0.2 using bluez-utils 3.7 ) I got two
'general protection faults' in my vanilla 2.6.21.4 kernel ( tainted with
NVidia module )
This appeared in the console:
-
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 01:44:35PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:52:03 +0200 Andreas Herrmann wrote:
>
> > Fix several build errors with PCMCIA=m && NET_PCMCIA=y:
> >
> >LD .tmp_vmlinux1
> >drivers/built-in.o: In function `nmclan_release':
> >nmclan_cs.c:(.t
Hi, Lennart!
Lennart Sorensen schrieb:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 05:32:48PM +0200, Clemens Koller wrote:
Robert Hancock schrieb:
Islam Amer wrote:
I am trying to build a settop box with two cards, a PVR-150 and a DVB
card. The mini-ITX motherboard has only one PCI slot, so I bought an
active PC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, David Chinner wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 12:56:44PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
I have that - apparently naive - idea that drives use strong checksum,
and will never return bad data, only good data or an error. If this
isn't right, then it would
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 12:54 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > What do we actually want the kernel to *do*? Stated in terms of "when the
> > dirty memory state is A, do B" and "when userspace does C, the kernel should
> > do D".
>
> When we have dirty pages awaiting write-out,
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>
> Hmm, or do you actually mean that if i'd done
>
> mount --bind /tmp/a /tmp
> mount --bind /tmp/b /tmp
> mount --bind /tmp/c /tmp
>
> that you would want to see information about the first two mounts?
>
Yes. Right now, you see all three without any
Andrew Morton wrote:
What do we actually want the kernel to *do*? Stated in terms of "when the
dirty memory state is A, do B" and "when userspace does C, the kernel should
do D".
When we have dirty pages awaiting write-out,
and the write-out device is completely idle,
then we should be writin
Andy Whitcroft wrote:
The following patch to 2.6.22-rc4-mm2 seems to update the early console
support for the 8250 uarts:
serial-convert-early_uart-to-earlycon-for-8250
This moved from naming the 8250 uart 'uart' to 'uart8250' in the
console= kernel parameter. While this is sensible long t
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
I have that - apparently naive - idea that drives use strong checksum,
and will never return bad data, only good data or an error. If this
isn't right, then it would really help to understand what the cau
On 070621 18:34, Akinobu Mita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/6/22, Alexander Wuerstlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> +asmlinkage int sys_sns_is_trusted(pid_t p)
>> +{
>> + struct task_struct *t;
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> + t = find_task_by_pid(p);
>> + if (IS_ERR(t)) {
>
> Sh
Quoting H. Peter Anvin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 01:57:33PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> ... or, alternatively, add a subfield to the first field (which would
> >> entail escaping whatever separator we choose):
> >>
> >> /dev/md6 /export ext3 rw,data=ord
On 06/21/2007 12:08 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> yeah - i'm not at all arguing in favor of the BTRL patch i did: i always
> liked the 'nicer' inner loop of spinlocks, which could btw also easily
> use MONITOR/MWAIT.
The "nice" inner loop is necessary or else it would generate huge amounts
of bus tra
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 02:23:30PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> (replying from a different ID as you didn't copy me on reply)
>
> On 6/20/07, Jan Blunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:22:41 +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> >
> >> +/*
> >> + * When propagating mount events to pe
Hi all,
Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc5
with patches available.
Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc.
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions
(BTW. There is a new category called "Will be fixed in 2.6.23")
Memory management
Subject: bug in i386 MTR
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Josef Sipek writes:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:55:45AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> ...
> > Talking about copyup and whiteout at VFS layer, we have already
> > demonstrated what complexity it takes to have these within VFS. Please
> > take a look at the copyup an
Hi all,
Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc5
with patches available.
Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc.
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions
(BTW. There is a new category called "Will be fixed in 2.6.23")
Unclassified
Subject: Device hang when off
Hi all,
Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc5.
Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc.
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions
(BTW. There is a new category called "Will be fixed in 2.6.23")
SATA/PATA
Subject: libata IT821X driver still fails! Hard-freezes
Hi all,
Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc5.
Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc.
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions
(BTW. There is a new category called "Will be fixed in 2.6.23")
Unclassified
Subject: PANIC: CPU too old for this kernel. with Cr
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> so the problem was not the trylock based spin_lock() itself (no matter
> how it's structured in the assembly), the problem was actually modifying
> the lock and re-modifying it again and again in a very tight
> high-frequency loop, and hence not giv
2007/6/22, Alexander Wuerstlein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+asmlinkage int sys_sns_is_trusted(pid_t p)
+{
+ struct task_struct *t;
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ t = find_task_by_pid(p);
+ if (IS_ERR(t)) {
Shouldn't it be:
if (!t) {
...
?
find_task_by_pid() returns NULL on fail
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 01:23:01AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> And then the user who uses such features in ways not permitted by the
> copyright holders are committing a crime. They can be prosecuted by
> the copyright holders and convicted of the crime.
Well we already clearly know the conte
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:28:07 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 10:57:55 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't had time to bisect this, but I'm having a problem on a AMD64
gentoo system where the printer doesn't work with recent ker
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 12:28:01PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> The authorship information got lost on these last two patches--both were
> originally by Meelap Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
> (The problem may have been that I had a From: line for him but not a
> Signed-off-by: line?)
Hm, no, actually I
Ram Pai wrote:
>
> Peter, I am not working on it currently. But i am interested in getting
> it done. I have the seed set of patches which had Al Viro's ideas
> incorporated. Infact those patches were sent on lkml 2 months back.
> Shall we start with those patches?
>
Are these the "unprivileged
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Tomas Neme wrote:
> as long as this right is not used by the software distributor to
> impose restrictions on the user's ability to adapt the software to
> their own needs. The GPLv3 paragraph above makes a fair concession in
> this regard, don't you agree?
no, one of
On 070621 18:19, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Johannes Schlumberger wrote:
>
> > Hi,
>
> Hi Johannes,
>
> > We (two students of CS) built a system for signing binaries and verifying
> > them
> > before executing. Our main focus was to implem
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:55:45AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
...
> Talking about copyup and whiteout at VFS layer, we have already
> demonstrated what complexity it takes to have these within VFS. Please
> take a look at the copyup and whiteout patches in our previous
> releases at:
>
> http://
The authorship information got lost on these last two patches--both were
originally by Meelap Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
(The problem may have been that I had a From: line for him but not a
Signed-off-by: line?)
--b.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 05:32:48PM +0200, Clemens Koller wrote:
> Robert Hancock schrieb:
> >Islam Amer wrote:
> >> I am trying to build a settop box with two cards, a PVR-150 and a DVB
> >> card. The mini-ITX motherboard has only one PCI slot, so I bought an
> >> active PCI riser.
>
> Please defi
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 14:20 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 01:57:33PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> ... or, alternatively, add a subfield to the first field (which would
> >> entail escaping whatever separator we choose):
> >>
> >> /dev/md6 /export ext
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 22:40 +0800, Li Yang wrote:
> This is a Chinese translated version of Documentation/HOWTO. Currently
> Chinese involvement in Linux kernel is very low, especially comparing to
> its largest population base. Language could be the main obstacle. Hope
> this document will help
Huang, Ying wrote:
> I think the queue IDs of different subsystem need not to be exclusive.
> The subsystem can allocate queue IDs arbitrarily. If one queue ID is
> shared between several subsystems, corresponding probing will be
> serialized. This will slow down the probing unnecessarily, but ther
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:55:16PM +0200, Johannes Schlumberger wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Johannes,
> We (two students of CS) built a system for signing binaries and verifying them
> before executing. Our main focus was to implement a way to inhibit execution
> of suid-binaries, which are not trustworthy
Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 01:57:33PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> ... or, alternatively, add a subfield to the first field (which would
>> entail escaping whatever separator we choose):
>>
>> /dev/md6 /export ext3 rw,data=ordered 0 0
>> /dev/md6:/users/foo /home/foo ext3 rw,data=o
I missed a compile warning here, apologies.
--b.
diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index c79f742..fbbbcab 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -3204,7 +3204,7 @@ get_nfs4_grace_period(void)
}
static void
-set_max_delegations()
+set_max_delegations
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 01:43:18PM +0800, Wang Zhenyu wrote:
> Thanks Carlo to report this problem. The following patch should fix
> his and potential issue.
Thanks for fixing it Wang :)
I have to admit that the Real Reason I did put time into this is because
I wanted to be sure that when debian u
Modified task_struct to hold a 'signed flag' which is set on exec(), inherited
on fork() and checked during exec before giving the new process suid/sgid
privileges.
sns.c contains our helper functions to verify the signatures.
sns_secret_key.dat contains the 'secret key' which is used for HMAC.
S
From: Johannes Schlumberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Checks on mmap and mprotect (i.e. libraries) wether they are signed and adjusts
the processe's signed flag accordingly.
If a process looses its signed state it gets, in our current design, killed, for
it is no longer trustworthy. A process also loos
Makes it possible for a userspace process to ask for the trustworthiness of
another process.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schlumberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/i386/kernel/syscall_table.S |1 +
include/asm-i386/unistd.h|3 ++-
security/sns.c | 15 +++
From: Johannes Schlumberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Makes it possible to get extended attributes for a given inode. We need this
for cases where we no longer have the corresponding direntry.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schlumberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
fs/xattr.c| 18 ++
I've caught up on this thread with growing disbelief while reading the
mails, so much that I've found it hard to decide where to reply to.
So people are claiming that AA is ugly, because it introduces pathnames
and possibly a regex interpreter. Ok, taste differs. We've got many
different flavours
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > what worries me a bit though is that my patch that made spinlocks
> > equally agressive to that loop didnt solve the hangs!
>
> Your parch kept doing "spin_trylock()", didn't it?
yeah - it changed sp
David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 17:54 +0200, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
>> Or maybe alternatively a feature that forwards the mail to you.
>
> A mailing list where you actually _receive_ the mail. Such an innovative
> idea... :)
>
> But yes, I agree that's quite cute. You could even
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Ok, here's a patch to do this. With that
> 55181000cd60334fe920c65ffbcdfe0e3f1de406
> should be reverted because it isn't needed anymore.
This seems buggy:
> + int notext = 0;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_KPROBES
> + notext = 1;
> +#endif
> #ifdef CON
Hi,
We (two students of CS) built a system for signing binaries and verifying them
before executing. Our main focus was to implement a way to inhibit execution
of suid-binaries, which are not trustworthy (i.e. not signed). Of course this
can also be used to grant other access rights, capabilities,
On Saturday 16 June 2007 01:49, Greg KH wrote:
> But for those types of models that do not map well to internal kernel
> structures, perhaps they should be modeled on top of a security system that
> does handle the internal kernel representation of things in the way the
> kernel works.
How exactly
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>
> BTW, I've looked a bit at these NMI watchdog traces, and now I'm not
> even sure it's necessarily the spinlock's problem (but I don't exclude
> this possibility yet). It seems both processors use task_rq_lock(), so
> there could be also a problem w
Quoting Chris Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> [folks, this is getting much too long-winded to stay a private thread]
>
> * Serge E. Hallyn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Quoting Chris Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > * Andrew Morgan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > > I share Casey's view that what'
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 17:54 +0200, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> Or maybe alternatively a feature that forwards the mail to you.
A mailing list where you actually _receive_ the mail. Such an innovative
idea... :)
But yes, I agree that's quite cute. You could even do it as an anonymous
read-only IMAP
Marc Pignat :
please use this patch, sorry for the later
My eyes are too tired or this patch is the same as the previous one :-\
Cheers,
--
Nicolas Ferre
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo inf
On Monday 18 June 2007 15:33, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 18:24 -0400, Karl MacMillan wrote:
> > There are two things:
> >
> > 1) relabeling (non-tranquility) is very problematic in general because
> > revocation is hard (and non-solved in Linux). So you would have to
> > address
On 2007.06.21 23:06:50 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 08:37 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > I would like to make a request to LKML archives. It would be a highly
> > useful feature to have an archive site where one can algorithmically
> > produce a URL from the Message-ID,
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> what worries me a bit though is that my patch that made spinlocks
> equally agressive to that loop didnt solve the hangs!
Your parch kept doing "spin_trylock()", didn't it?
That's a read-modify-write thing, and keeps bouncing the cacheline back
and
Al Boldi wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 06:55:47AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
>> > Michal Piotrowski wrote:
>> > > On 18/06/07, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
[on the tracking of review status of patches]
>> > > > > however we nee
On 06/20/2007 07:04 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> As far as I know, the biggest reason to use DEBUG_RODATA is
>
> (a) Hey, it's a cheap way to check one thing
>
> (b) An added layer of security (which it's not that great for, but it
> might make sense to make it more of a real security feat
Hi Oliver,
On 21/06/07, Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I get reproducible hangs when running bash_shared_mapping from the
autotest suite. I've tested with a USB mass storage device and a PATA
hard drive. No difference. Vanilla 2.6.22-rc5 and -git5 are affected. Ext3
works flawless
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:54:11 -0300 Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> Some interrupt entry points are currently defined in i8259.c
> They probably belong in a header. Right now, their only user is
> init_IRQ, justifying their declaration in-file. But when virtualization
> comes in, we may be inter
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:28:07 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 10:57:55 -0700 (PDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I haven't had time to bisect this, but I'm having a problem on a AMD64
> > gentoo system where the printer doesn't work with recent kernels.
> >
> > 2.6.18-rc3 worked
Hi, Robert!
Robert Hancock schrieb:
Islam Amer wrote:
>> I am trying to build a settop box with two cards, a PVR-150 and a DVB
>> card. The mini-ITX motherboard has only one PCI slot, so I bought an
>> active PCI riser.
Please define "active". Is there a PCI bridge chip on the riser card?
Or b
Alan Cox wrote:
You've made an important mistake. You said "their system". Now its "our
code" and "whoever bought the units' hardware" so it isn't their anything.
Yes, the hardware belongs to the user, and the software belongs to the Linux
community. However I think I wasn't 100% clear, I also
> This is a Chinese translated version of Documentation/HOWTO. Currently
> Chinese involvement in Linux kernel is very low, especially comparing to
> its largest population base. Language could be the main obstacle. Hope
> this document will help more Chinese to contribute to Linux kernel.
>
>
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > I'll see if I can reproduce your problem here.
>
> Yes, I can. It's only necessary to load usb-storage (without any devices
> actually using it) and it fails device_suspend() immediately (I don't think
> it's freezer-related).
>
> I've got the f
Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [CC'd Al Viro and Alan Cox, restored patch]
>
>> > There are races involving the garbage collector, that can throw away
>> > perfectly good packets with AF_UNIX sockets in them.
>> >
>> > The problems arise when a socket goes from installed to in-fligh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
how exactly can they prevent a system that's been tampered with from
accessing their network?
By denying access to their servers? By not granting whatever is
needed to initiate ne
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:40:17PM +0800, Li Yang wrote:
>This is a Chinese translated version of Documentation/HOWTO. Currently
>Chinese involvement in Linux kernel is very low, especially comparing to
>its largest population base. Language could be the main obstacle. Hope
>this document will h
On 06/20/2007 07:17 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:16:47 -0400
> Chuck Ebbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=241598]
>>
>> Oops happens here in kernel 2.6.20.11:
>> drivers/usb/serial/ir-usb.c, line 557:
>>
>> /*
please use this patch, sorry for the later
Regards
Marc
--- drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c-2.6.22-rc5.orig 2007-06-21 16:27:31.0
+0200
+++ drivers/mmc/host/at91_mci.c-2.6.22-rc5 2007-06-21 16:42:48.0
+0200
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ static inline void at91mci_sg_to_dma(str
Hello Nicolas!
Good news!
I think I've found the problem, this seems to work (tested with SLUB and SLAB).
If you're in the cleanup stage, I think the whole kmap and kunmap can be in the
'if (cpu_is_at91rm9200())',
we have no reason to kmap data we don't touch :-D
Regards
Marc
--- drivers/mmc
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:56:33AM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
> Providing the changes back itself is a great thing altogether.
It also makes sense. If the changes are accepted back, the community at
large will keep the changes maintained. Less work for me to do when
going to newer code versions
ian wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
arm26 changes acked-by: Ian Molton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Did you try building it to flush out any missing-header problems?
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a mes
John Sigler wrote:
Hello everyone,
Here's my situation:
I'm pushing data in chunks of 1316 bytes to a PCI device at 38 Mbit/s.
In other words, I write 1316 bytes to the device every 277 microseconds.
I've noticed that the latency of this operation varies immensely. Most
of the time it comple
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 08:37 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I would like to make a request to LKML archives. It would be a highly
> useful feature to have an archive site where one can algorithmically
> produce a URL from the Message-ID, so one can post a clickable URL from
> a delivered message w
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 05:52:40PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 20, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
> > A patent prevents you from using the software in any way at all,
> > while a hardware restriction prevents you from using the software on
> > that particular hardware,
On Thursday, 21 June 2007 15:30, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > At present, if a user mode helper is running while
> > usermodehelper_pm_callback()
> > is executed, the helper may be frozen and the completion in
> > call_usermodehelper_exec()
Some interrupt entry points are currently defined in i8259.c
They probably belong in a header. Right now, their only user is
init_IRQ, justifying their declaration in-file. But when virtualization
comes in, we may be interested in using that functions in late
initializations.
Signed-off-by: Glaube
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 11:33 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> OK. This leads me to a question: is it OK for me to add support for my
> non-input device to inputattach, or is a separate, dedicated helper
> tool preferred? Both ways are fine with me, I don't know what the
> input subsystem maintainers exp
> Shouldn't we add something to the help texts?
>
> + This option also marks kernel text pages as write-protected,
> + except if you enable KPROBES.
>
> CMIIW.
>
> As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, replacing CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA by
> CONFIG_WRITEPROTECT_RODATA and CONFIG_WRITEPROTEC
301 - 400 of 490 matches
Mail list logo
