UML build broken since 3.0.75 (also affects 3.2.x)

2013-05-25 Thread Antoine Martin
]: *** [mm/memory.o] Error 1 make: *** [mm] Error 2 This fix is just a copy of what is found in later kernels. Compiled and boot tested both 3.0.80 and 3.2.45, x86_64 and i386. Signed-off-by: Antoine Martin --- a/arch/um/include/asm/pgtable.h 2013-05-25 09:20:51.42000 + +++ b/arch/um

UML build broken since 3.0.75 (also affects 3.2.x)

2013-05-25 Thread Antoine Martin
]: *** [mm/memory.o] Error 1 make: *** [mm] Error 2 This fix is just a copy of what is found in later kernels. Compiled and boot tested both 3.0.80 and 3.2.45, x86_64 and i386. Signed-off-by: Antoine Martin anto...@nagafix.co.uk --- a/arch/um/include/asm/pgtable.h 2013-05-25 09:20:51.42000

Re: [kvm-devel] boot stops after console handover?

2008-01-12 Thread Antoine Martin
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote: > On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:01:28PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: >> Antoine Martin wrote: >> >>> FYI, just tried building 2.6.24-rc7-git4 and got this warning: >>> (...) >> Probably harmless, but worth reporting to lkml. >

Re: [kvm-devel] boot stops after console handover?

2008-01-12 Thread Antoine Martin
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon wrote: On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:01:28PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: Antoine Martin wrote: FYI, just tried building 2.6.24-rc7-git4 and got this warning: (...) Probably harmless, but worth reporting to lkml. couldn't replicate it here, but I'd seen usually those

Re: CFS: new java yield graphs

2007-09-25 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 These are pure cpu scheduling tests, not doing any I/O this time. All these tests are still "pathological" in the sense that they are only meant to show differences between schedulers rather than try to simulate real usage scenarios. all the graphs

Re: CFS: new java yield graphs

2007-09-25 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 These are pure cpu scheduling tests, not doing any I/O this time. All these tests are still pathological in the sense that they are only meant to show differences between schedulers rather than try to simulate real usage scenarios. all the graphs

bug in fsck or ext2/ext3?

2007-09-24 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi Ted / LKML, I've got this snapshot of an ext3 filesystem with a directory that simply cannot be removed! (image below is just 1.2MB) As root: # wget http://users.nagafix.co.uk/~antoine/root-broken.bz2 # bunzip2 root-broken.bz2 # mount -o loop -t

Re: CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading

2007-09-17 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Satyam Sharma wrote: > I don't have access to any real/meaningful SMP systems, so I wonder > how much sense it makes in practical terms for me to try and run these > tests locally on my little boxen ... would be helpful if someone with > 4/8 CPU

Re: CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading

2007-09-17 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Satyam Sharma wrote: I don't have access to any real/meaningful SMP systems, so I wonder how much sense it makes in practical terms for me to try and run these tests locally on my little boxen ... would be helpful if someone with 4/8 CPU systems

Re: CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading [FIXED]

2007-09-14 Thread Antoine Martin
binedTests4-10msYield-noload.png Thanks Ingo! Does this mean that I'll have to keep doing: echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_yield_bug_workaround Or are you planning on finding a more elegant solution? # find /proc -name "*workaround*" /proc/sys/kernel/sched_yield_bug_workaround /proc/sys/net/

Re: CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading [FIXED]

2007-09-14 Thread Antoine Martin
on finding a more elegant solution? # find /proc -name *workaround* /proc/sys/kernel/sched_yield_bug_workaround /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_workaround_signed_windows On 9/13/07, Antoine Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All the 2.6.23-rc kernels performed poorly (except -rc3!): This is an interesting

Re: some bad numbers with Java/database threading

2007-09-13 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I've tested a couple more kernels: 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 and 2.6.23-rc6 with the "sched_yield_bug_workaround" patch from Ingo, results are here:

Re: some bad numbers with Java/database threading

2007-09-13 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I've tested a couple more kernels: 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 and 2.6.23-rc6 with the sched_yield_bug_workaround patch from Ingo, results are here:

CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading

2007-09-12 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi list, I was working on some unit tests and thought I'd give CFS a whirl to see if it had any impact on my workloads (to see what the fuss was about), and I came up with some pretty disturbing numbers:

CFS: some bad numbers with Java/database threading

2007-09-12 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi list, I was working on some unit tests and thought I'd give CFS a whirl to see if it had any impact on my workloads (to see what the fuss was about), and I came up with some pretty disturbing numbers:

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-04 Thread Antoine Martin
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, Antoine Martin wrote: and this one: http://www.suse.de/~kraxel/uml/patches/2.6.18-rc4/uml-x11-fb which applied cleanly, but is not letting me set the option - Kconfig is beyond me: arch/um/Kconfig:144:warning: 'select' used by config symbol 'X11_FB

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-04 Thread Antoine Martin
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, Antoine Martin wrote: and this one: http://www.suse.de/~kraxel/uml/patches/2.6.18-rc4/uml-x11-fb which applied cleanly, but is not letting me set the option - Kconfig is beyond me: arch/um/Kconfig:144:warning: 'select' used by config symbol 'X11_FB

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-03 Thread Antoine Martin
Antoine Martin wrote: Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:22:00PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: There are patches floating around for a UML frame buffer device. Gerd Kraxel^H^H^H^H^H^HHoffmann did one using plain X11, which worked great when I gave it a try. I suggest taking a look

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-03 Thread Antoine Martin
Blaisorblade wrote: On lunedì 2 aprile 2007, Antoine Martin wrote: Jeff Dike wrote: On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:58:45PM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote: I reckon that one critical thing which could drastically increase the user base would be to have a working virtual framebuffer implementation

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-03 Thread Antoine Martin
Blaisorblade wrote: On lunedì 2 aprile 2007, Antoine Martin wrote: Jeff Dike wrote: On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:58:45PM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote: I reckon that one critical thing which could drastically increase the user base would be to have a working virtual framebuffer implementation

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-03 Thread Antoine Martin
Antoine Martin wrote: Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:22:00PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: There are patches floating around for a UML frame buffer device. Gerd Kraxel^H^H^H^H^H^HHoffmann did one using plain X11, which worked great when I gave it a try. I suggest taking a look

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-02 Thread Antoine Martin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote: Just like the network auto-configuration via dhcp, it would allow users to download images+kernel and run them like appliances without understanding anything about X or UML, just click and run. True, but I don't

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-02 Thread Antoine Martin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:22:00PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: There are patches floating around for a UML frame buffer device. Gerd Kraxel^H^H^H^H^H^HHoffmann did one using plain X11, which worked great when I gave it a try. I suggest taking a look at Gerd's patches.

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-02 Thread Antoine Martin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:58:45PM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote: I reckon that one critical thing which could drastically increase the user base would be to have a working virtual framebuffer implementation. Why? I've never understood what a framebuffer gives you that you

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-02 Thread Antoine Martin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 08:58:45PM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote: I reckon that one critical thing which could drastically increase the user base would be to have a working virtual framebuffer implementation. Why? I've never understood what a framebuffer gives you that you

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-02 Thread Antoine Martin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Antoine Martin wrote: Just like the network auto-configuration via dhcp, it would allow users to download images+kernel and run them like appliances without understanding anything about X or UML, just click and run. True, but I don't

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-02 Thread Antoine Martin
Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 01:22:00PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: There are patches floating around for a UML frame buffer device. Gerd Kraxel^H^H^H^H^H^HHoffmann did one using plain X11, which worked great when I gave it a try. I suggest taking a look at Gerd's patches.

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel & rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-01 Thread Antoine Martin
[...] in short: it`s quite some work to be done to have your uml 2.6.21 with root-fs up and running and working cleanly. whenever i search the net for some appropriate UML fs image, those i find are very often old and outdated... Hmm... I'd think we need a wizard for configuration. Plus some

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] UML kernel rootfs bundle with every kernel release ?

2007-04-01 Thread Antoine Martin
[...] in short: it`s quite some work to be done to have your uml 2.6.21 with root-fs up and running and working cleanly. whenever i search the net for some appropriate UML fs image, those i find are very often old and outdated... Hmm... I'd think we need a wizard for configuration. Plus some

Re: Bug report : reproducible memory allocator bug in 2.6.20-rc6

2007-03-21 Thread Antoine Martin
Re: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/28/146 Just got a similar OOPS on a system under heavy load (transcode + p2p), with kernel 2.6.20.3 / x86_64 (in free_block). [] free_block+0xae/0x13c [] drain_array+0x93/0xd1 [] cache_reap+0xea/0x239 [] cache_reap+0x0/0x239 [] run_workqueue+0x95/0x140 []

Re: Bug report : reproducible memory allocator bug in 2.6.20-rc6

2007-03-21 Thread Antoine Martin
Re: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/28/146 Just got a similar OOPS on a system under heavy load (transcode + p2p), with kernel 2.6.20.3 / x86_64 (in free_block). [802c5b95] free_block+0xae/0x13c [802c5cb6] drain_array+0x93/0xd1 [802c6820] cache_reap+0xea/0x239

BUG: warning at kernel/cpu.c:51/unlock_cpu_hotplug() - 2.6.18.6

2007-02-15 Thread Antoine Martin
I just caught this in the log whilst running some unit tests. (the test was in the process of starting 900 Java threads) audit(1171565587.887:96): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=4294967295 BUG: warning at kernel/cpu.c:51/unlock_cpu_hotplug() Call Trace: [] dump_stack+0x12/0x17 []

BUG: warning at kernel/cpu.c:51/unlock_cpu_hotplug() - 2.6.18.6

2007-02-15 Thread Antoine Martin
I just caught this in the log whilst running some unit tests. (the test was in the process of starting 900 Java threads) audit(1171565587.887:96): enforcing=0 old_enforcing=1 auid=4294967295 BUG: warning at kernel/cpu.c:51/unlock_cpu_hotplug() Call Trace: [80269c98]

reporting lost ticks

2007-02-10 Thread Antoine Martin
Andi Kleen wrote: [Snip] You run with report_lost_ticks and report the results to linux-kernel Doing as I am told, here we go: This is 100% reproducible, ie: just doing a big rsync between 2 disks and burning a DVD at the same time. Note: the system isn't very responsive when this happens,

reporting lost ticks

2007-02-10 Thread Antoine Martin
Andi Kleen wrote: [Snip] You run with report_lost_ticks and report the results to linux-kernel Doing as I am told, here we go: This is 100% reproducible, ie: just doing a big rsync between 2 disks and burning a DVD at the same time. Note: the system isn't very responsive when this happens,

APIC Oops on 2.6.19.1

2007-02-03 Thread Antoine Martin
As Matt Mackall said: "So yes, if a user reports a bug that's attributable to a single bit memory error that's otherwise unreproduced and unexplained, it's totally reasonable to chalk it up to cosmic rays until some sort of pattern of reports emerges." So I guess that the only way to figure

APIC Oops on 2.6.19.1

2007-02-03 Thread Antoine Martin
As Matt Mackall said: So yes, if a user reports a bug that's attributable to a single bit memory error that's otherwise unreproduced and unexplained, it's totally reasonable to chalk it up to cosmic rays until some sort of pattern of reports emerges. So I guess that the only way to figure

Re: preempt with selinux NULL pointer dereference

2005-08-05 Thread Antoine Martin
> > [ 4788.218951] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at > > 0028 RIP: > > [ 4788.218959] {inode_has_perm+81} > > [ 4788.218971] PGD 2485f067 PUD 0 > > [ 4788.218975] Oops: [1] PREEMPT > > [ 4788.218977] CPU 0 > > [ 4788.218979] Modules linked in: parport_pc lp

Re: preempt with selinux NULL pointer dereference

2005-08-05 Thread Antoine Martin
[ 4788.218951] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0028 RIP: [ 4788.218959] 80247381{inode_has_perm+81} [ 4788.218971] PGD 2485f067 PUD 0 [ 4788.218975] Oops: [1] PREEMPT [ 4788.218977] CPU 0 [ 4788.218979] Modules linked in: parport_pc lp