On 10/5/07, Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:01:47PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > >
> > > > I realise it'll make the patch
On 10/5/07, Linas Vepstas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:01:47PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:01:47PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >
> > > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
> > > particularly good name for
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:01:47PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
particularly good name for the variable
On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
> > particularly good name for the variable anymore.
>
> Sure, what about?
>
> Clarify when RTAS logging
On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
particularly good name for the variable anymore.
Sure, what about?
Clarify when RTAS logging is enabled.
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 02:09:46PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> Until we initialise what exactly?
Until we allocate the error log buffer. The original crash was
for a null-pointer deref of the unallocated buffer. I just sent
out a patch to fix this; its a bit simpler than the below.
In
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 02:09:46PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Until we initialise what exactly?
Until we allocate the error log buffer. The original crash was
for a null-pointer deref of the unallocated buffer. I just sent
out a patch to fix this; its a bit simpler than the below.
In
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:19 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
> > particularly good name for the variable anymore.
>
> Sure, what about?
Better .. but .. :D
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
> particularly good name for the variable anymore.
Sure, what about?
Clarify when RTAS logging is enabled.
Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 10:26 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 06:28:19PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > > Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
> > > this in the previous -mm also:
>
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 06:28:19PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
> > this in the previous -mm also:
>
> I haven't forgetten about this ... and am looking at it
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
> this in the previous -mm also:
I haven't forgetten about this ... and am looking at it now.
Seems that whenever I go to reserve the machine pSeries-102,
someone
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
this in the previous -mm also:
I haven't forgetten about this ... and am looking at it now.
Seems that whenever I go to reserve the machine pSeries-102,
someone else
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 06:28:19PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
this in the previous -mm also:
I haven't forgetten about this ... and am looking at it now.
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 10:26 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 06:28:19PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
this in the previous -mm also:
I
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
particularly good name for the variable anymore.
Sure, what about?
Clarify when RTAS logging is enabled.
Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:19 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a
particularly good name for the variable anymore.
Sure, what about?
Better .. but .. :D
diff
Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
this in the previous -mm also:
Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x
Faulting instruction address: 0xc0047ac8
cpu 0x0: Vector: 300 (Data Access) at [c058f750]
pc:
Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had
this in the previous -mm also:
Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x
Faulting instruction address: 0xc0047ac8
cpu 0x0: Vector: 300 (Data Access) at [c058f750]
pc:
20 matches
Mail list logo
