On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:48:24 EDT, Rob Landley wrote:
> In regard to translating kernel messages:
>
> On Monday 09 July 2007 01:36:31 H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Kunai, Takashi wrote:
> > > (1) Your kernel development proposal will be greatly supported by
> > > Japanese vendor community. At the
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:48:24 EDT, Rob Landley wrote:
In regard to translating kernel messages:
On Monday 09 July 2007 01:36:31 H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Kunai, Takashi wrote:
(1) Your kernel development proposal will be greatly supported by
Japanese vendor community. At the same time, it
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:13:19 PDT, Tim Bird wrote:
> Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > Further, yet another kernel config option could allow distros to output
> > the calculated MD5 sum to be printed, much like we do with timestamps
> > today.
>
> > Comments?
>
>
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:13:19 PDT, Tim Bird wrote:
Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
Further, yet another kernel config option could allow distros to output
the calculated MD5 sum to be printed, much like we do with timestamps
today.
Comments?
Would the compiled-in text then also become
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:51:51 PDT, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> For those of us who have not been in on these meetings, I think that
> some serious justifications are needed. The last paragraph began to
> go in that direction, but it needs to be more detailed and convincing.
> And "for debugging"
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:38:53 +0200, holzheu wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 11:41 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Your proposal is similar to one I made to some Japanese developers
> > > earlier this year. I was more modest, proposing that we
> > >
> > > - add an enhanced printk
> > >
>
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:38:53 +0200, holzheu wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 11:41 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
snip
Your proposal is similar to one I made to some Japanese developers
earlier this year. I was more modest, proposing that we
- add an enhanced printk
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:51:51 PDT, Randy Dunlap wrote:
For those of us who have not been in on these meetings, I think that
some serious justifications are needed. The last paragraph began to
go in that direction, but it needs to be more detailed and convincing.
And for debugging doesn't
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:30:43 PST, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
> Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > Don't confused KS with a conference;
> > it is a workshop for a very, very large, very very active project.
>
> ... and *growing*, which is the real issue I think.
>
> S
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:49:11 +0100, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>
> Gerrit mentioned that half the committee shows up to be dead weight when
> it comes down to the crunch at the end, so if this is the case, does it
> really make sense to keep said members on the committee? LCA had how
> many proposals?
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:49:11 +0100, Jes Sorensen wrote:
Gerrit mentioned that half the committee shows up to be dead weight when
it comes down to the crunch at the end, so if this is the case, does it
really make sense to keep said members on the committee? LCA had how
many proposals? they
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:30:43 PST, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
Don't confused KS with a conference;
it is a workshop for a very, very large, very very active project.
... and *growing*, which is the real issue I think.
Something that might make sense for KS is to have
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:51:57 PST, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:57:06 +0800
> Aubrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Opening file with O_DIRECT flag can do the un-buffered read/write access.
> > So if I need un-buffered access, I have to change all of my
> >
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:51:57 PST, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:57:06 +0800
Aubrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Opening file with O_DIRECT flag can do the un-buffered read/write access.
So if I need un-buffered access, I have to change all of my
applications to add
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:53:55 BST, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Gwe, 2005-07-22 at 00:53 -0400, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > the fast path slower and less maintainable. if you are really concerned
> > about isolating many competing servers on a single piece of hardware, then
> > run separate virtualized
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:53:55 BST, Alan Cox wrote:
On Gwe, 2005-07-22 at 00:53 -0400, Mark Hahn wrote:
the fast path slower and less maintainable. if you are really concerned
about isolating many competing servers on a single piece of hardware, then
run separate virtualized environments,
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:53:58 EDT, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > > > yes, that's the crux. CKRM is all about resolving conflicting resource
> > > > demands in a multi-user, multi-server, multi-purpose machine. this is
> > > > a
> > > > huge undertaking, and I'd argue that it's completely inappropriate
Sorry - I didn't see Mark's original comment, so I'm replying to
a reply which I did get. ;-)
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:59:09 EDT, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> Mark Hahn wrote:
> >>I suspect that the main problem is that this patch is not a mainstream
> >>kernel feature that will gain multiple uses,
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:46:37 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> >>I imagine that the cpu controller is missing from this version of CKRM
> >>because the bugs introduced to the cpu controller during upgrading from
> >>2.6.5 to 2.6.10 vers
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:06:14 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
> Paul Jackson wrote:
> > Matthew wrote:
> >
> >>I don't see the large ifdefs you're referring to in -mm's
> >>kernel/sched.c.
> >
> >
> > Perhaps someone who knows CKRM better than I can explain why the CKRM
> > version in some SuSE
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:06:14 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
Paul Jackson wrote:
Matthew wrote:
I don't see the large ifdefs you're referring to in -mm's
kernel/sched.c.
Perhaps someone who knows CKRM better than I can explain why the CKRM
version in some SuSE releases based on
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:46:37 +1000, Peter Williams wrote:
Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
I imagine that the cpu controller is missing from this version of CKRM
because the bugs introduced to the cpu controller during upgrading from
2.6.5 to 2.6.10 version have not yet been resolved.
I
Sorry - I didn't see Mark's original comment, so I'm replying to
a reply which I did get. ;-)
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:59:09 EDT, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
Mark Hahn wrote:
I suspect that the main problem is that this patch is not a mainstream
kernel feature that will gain multiple uses, but
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:53:58 EDT, Mark Hahn wrote:
yes, that's the crux. CKRM is all about resolving conflicting resource
demands in a multi-user, multi-server, multi-purpose machine. this is
a
huge undertaking, and I'd argue that it's completely inappropriate for
*most*
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:48:22 PDT, David Mosberger wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:33:59 -0700 (PDT), Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Christoph> Which benchmark would you recommend for this?
>
> I don't know about "recommend", but I think SPECweb, SPECjbb,
>
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:48:22 PDT, David Mosberger wrote:
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:33:59 -0700 (PDT), Christoph Lameter [EMAIL
PROTECTED] said:
Christoph Which benchmark would you recommend for this?
I don't know about recommend, but I think SPECweb, SPECjbb,
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:32:32 PST, Paul Jackson wrote:
> A question for the CKRM developers:
>
> What middleware packages, outside the kernel, exist or are
> in the works that will rely on CKRM?
Primarily, CKRM classes can be instantiated today by simple
echo's into the /rcfs
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:55:05 +0200, Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:05:30 -0800,
> Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi=F3:
>
>
> > worth having. I for one am a CKRM skeptic, so won't be much help to you
> > in that quest. Good luck.
> >
> > I don't see any performance
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:53:19 PST, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 23:03 -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > The code provides a fairly simple mechanism for adding controllers for
> > any resource type
>
> Last time I saw the memory controller, it was 3000 lines
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:53:19 PST, Dave Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 23:03 -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
The code provides a fairly simple mechanism for adding controllers for
any resource type
Last time I saw the memory controller, it was 3000 lines. Doesn't seem
too simple to me
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:55:05 +0200, Diego Calleja wrote:
El Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:05:30 -0800,
Paul Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi=F3:
worth having. I for one am a CKRM skeptic, so won't be much help to you
in that quest. Good luck.
I don't see any performance numbers, either on
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:32:32 PST, Paul Jackson wrote:
A question for the CKRM developers:
What middleware packages, outside the kernel, exist or are
in the works that will rely on CKRM?
Primarily, CKRM classes can be instantiated today by simple
echo's into the /rcfs
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:05:30 PST, Paul Jackson wrote:
> gerrit wrote:
> > This is the core patch set for CKRM
>
> Welcome.
Hi Paul.
> Newcomers to CKRM might want to start reading these patches with "[patch
> 8/8] CKRM: Documentation". Starting with patch 0/8 or 1/8 will be
> difficult, at
ailabh Nagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs/rcfs/Makefile
=
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/fs/Makefile 2005-03-1
-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig/fs/Makefile 2005-03-17 17:34:17.0 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.12-rc1/fs/rcfs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.12-rc1.orig
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:05:30 PST, Paul Jackson wrote:
gerrit wrote:
This is the core patch set for CKRM
Welcome.
Hi Paul.
Newcomers to CKRM might want to start reading these patches with [patch
8/8] CKRM: Documentation. Starting with patch 0/8 or 1/8 will be
difficult, at least if
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:25:28 CST, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Shailabh Nagar wrote:
>
> > Sounds like a case is being made to make CONFIG_RCFS a "y" and eliminate
> > the possibility of it being a loadable module ?
>
> No, I believe the idea was to make CONFIG_RCFS be automatically set to
> the
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:11:08 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 12:54:17PM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:52:23 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:33:12AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 29 Nov 20
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:52:23 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:33:12AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:00:47 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:47:32AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > > > +typedef vo
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:00:39 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:34:38AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> >
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:23:23 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:49:09AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > +#define TC_DEBUG(fmt, args...) do { \
> > +/* printk("%s: " fmt, __FUNCTION__ , ## args); */ } while (0)
>
> Again with the new debug
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:43:11 EST, James Morris wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
>
> > +int sock_mkdir(struct inode *, struct dentry *, int mode);
> > +int sock_rmdir(struct inode *, struct dentry *);
> > +
> > +int sock_create_noperm(struct
This is a long overdue response to the many code review comments
that came in during the last posting of the CKRM core code. While
CKRM has not by any means been inactive, a variety of other deliverables
have taken precedence until recently.
However, the following set of postings is a step
of kernel list type
Signed-off-by: Shailabh Nagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Hubertus Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
fs/exec.c |2
inc
.
Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Hubertus Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
fs/proc/array.c| 18 +
fs/proc/b
agar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
include/linux/ckrm_ce.h | 108 +
include/linux/ckrm_events.h |8
include/linux/ckrm_rc.h | 355
include/linux/rcfs
Index: linux-2.6.11-rc5/fs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.11-rc5.orig/fs/Makefile 2005-02-23 20:03:03.0 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-rc5/fs/Makefile2005-02-24 00:55:06.483875663 -0800
@@ -92,6 +92,7 @@
obj-$(CONFIG_XFS_FS)
ailabh Nagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.11-rc5/fs/rcfs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.11-rc5.orig/fs/rcfs/
This patch provides the extensions for CKRM to track per socket classes.
This is the base to enable socket based resource control for inbound
connection control, bandwidth control etc.
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This patch provides a resource controller for limiting the number
of tasks per class in CKRM.
Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Hubertus Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Gerri
This patch adds all current documentation on CKRM.
Signed-Off-By: Hubertus Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-Off-By:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:15:48 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:48:24AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> > +#include
> &g
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:01:48 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:50:39AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > +static spinlock_t stub_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
> > +
> > +static get_ref_t real_get_ref = NULL;
> > +static put_ref_t real_put_
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:00:47 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:47:32AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > +/* Changes
> > + *
> > + * 12 Nov 2003
> > + *Created.
> > + * 22 Apr 2004
> > + *Adopted to classtypes
> > + */
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:38:25 PST, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:46:53AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> > @@ -912,6 +915,9 @@
> > extern void set_task_comm(struct task_struct *tsk, char *from);
> > extern void get_task_comm(char *to, struct task_struct *tsk
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:38:25 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:46:53AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
@@ -912,6 +915,9 @@
extern void set_task_comm(struct task_struct *tsk, char *from);
extern void get_task_comm(char *to, struct task_struct *tsk);
+#define PF_MEMIO
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:00:47 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:47:32AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+/* Changes
+ *
+ * 12 Nov 2003
+ *Created.
+ * 22 Apr 2004
+ *Adopted to classtypes
+ */
Ok, I'm not going to say this for every future file
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:01:48 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:50:39AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+static spinlock_t stub_lock = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
+
+static get_ref_t real_get_ref = NULL;
+static put_ref_t real_put_ref = NULL;
+
+void ckrm_numtasks_register
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:15:48 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:48:24AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+#include linux/module.h
+#include linux/list.h
+#include linux/fs.h
+#include linux/namei.h
+#include linux/namespace.h
+#include linux/dcache.h
+#include linux
This patch adds all current documentation on CKRM.
Signed-Off-By: Hubertus Franke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED
This patch provides a resource controller for limiting the number
of tasks per class in CKRM.
Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Hubertus Franke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED
This patch provides the extensions for CKRM to track per socket classes.
This is the base to enable socket based resource control for inbound
connection control, bandwidth control etc.
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.11-rc5/fs/rcfs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.11-rc5.orig/fs/rcfs/Makefile 2005-02-24 00:55:06.487875181
Index: linux-2.6.11-rc5/fs/Makefile
===
--- linux-2.6.11-rc5.orig/fs/Makefile 2005-02-23 20:03:03.0 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-rc5/fs/Makefile2005-02-24 00:55:06.483875663 -0800
@@ -92,6 +92,7 @@
obj-$(CONFIG_XFS_FS)
PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Vivek Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
include/linux/ckrm_ce.h | 108 +
include/linux/ckrm_events.h |8
include/linux/ckrm_rc.h | 355
include/linux/rcfs.h| 96
include/linux/sched.h
.
Signed-Off-By: Chandra Seetharaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Hubertus Franke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Shailabh Nagar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-Off-By: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fs/proc/array.c| 18 +
fs/proc/base.c | 18 +
include
of kernel list type
Signed-off-by: Shailabh Nagar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Hubertus Franke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Chandra Seetharaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Gerrit Huizenga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fs/exec.c |2
include/linux/ckrm_events.h | 190
This is a long overdue response to the many code review comments
that came in during the last posting of the CKRM core code. While
CKRM has not by any means been inactive, a variety of other deliverables
have taken precedence until recently.
However, the following set of postings is a step
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:43:11 EST, James Morris wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+int sock_mkdir(struct inode *, struct dentry *, int mode);
+int sock_rmdir(struct inode *, struct dentry *);
+
+int sock_create_noperm(struct inode *, struct dentry *, int
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:23:23 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:49:09AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+#define TC_DEBUG(fmt, args...) do { \
+/* printk(%s: fmt, __FUNCTION__ , ## args); */ } while (0)
Again with the new debug macro :(
+static struct ckrm_task_class
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:00:39 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:34:38AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+#include linux/module.h
+#include linux/init.h
+#include linux/slab.h
+#include asm/errno.h
+#include asm/div64.h
+#include linux/list.h
+#include linux/spinlock.h
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:52:23 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:33:12AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:00:47 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 10:47:32AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
+typedef void *(*ce_classify_fct_t) (enum ckrm_event event
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:11:08 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 12:54:17PM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 09:52:23 PST, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:33:12AM -0800, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:00:47 PST, Greg KH wrote
At Sequent, we found that there are a small set of processes which are
"critical" to the system's operation in that they should not be killed
on swap shortage, memory shortage, etc. This included things like init,
potentially inetd, the swapper, page daemon, clusters heartbeat daemon,
and
At Sequent, we found that there are a small set of processes which are
"critical" to the system's operation in that they should not be killed
on swap shortage, memory shortage, etc. This included things like init,
potentially inetd, the swapper, page daemon, clusters heartbeat daemon,
and
77 matches
Mail list logo
