Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Kai Germaschewski writes:
> > The patch is right, the explanation was wrong. Sorry, I didn't CC l-k when
> > I found what was really going on. Other source files used a global
> > initialized variable "divert_if" as well, so this became the same one as
Russell King [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kai Germaschewski writes:
The patch is right, the explanation was wrong. Sorry, I didn't CC l-k when
I found what was really going on. Other source files used a global
initialized variable "divert_if" as well, so this became the same one as
the one
Kai Germaschewski writes:
> The patch is right, the explanation was wrong. Sorry, I didn't CC l-k when
> I found what was really going on. Other source files used a global
> initialized variable "divert_if" as well, so this became the same one as
> the one referenced in isdn_common.c. That's why
On 3 Jan 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Kai Germaschewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think the problem was that we relied on divert_if being initialized to
> > zero automatically, which didn't happen because it was not declared static
> > and therefore not in .bss (*is this true?*).
>
Kai Germaschewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Gerold Jury wrote:
>
> > I have reversed the patches part by part, the only thing that makes a
> > difference is the diversion services.
> > The reason for this remains unknown for me.
>
> I think I found it. Could everybody
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Kai Germaschewski wrote:
> I think the problem was that we relied on divert_if being initialized to
> zero automatically, which didn't happen because it was not declared static
> and therefore not in .bss (*is this true?*).
This is true in this particular case, and your
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Kai Germaschewski wrote:
I think the problem was that we relied on divert_if being initialized to
zero automatically, which didn't happen because it was not declared static
and therefore not in .bss (*is this true?*).
This is true in this particular case, and your added
Kai Germaschewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Gerold Jury wrote:
I have reversed the patches part by part, the only thing that makes a
difference is the diversion services.
The reason for this remains unknown for me.
I think I found it. Could everybody who was
On 3 Jan 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Kai Germaschewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the problem was that we relied on divert_if being initialized to
zero automatically, which didn't happen because it was not declared static
and therefore not in .bss (*is this true?*).
All
Kai Germaschewski writes:
The patch is right, the explanation was wrong. Sorry, I didn't CC l-k when
I found what was really going on. Other source files used a global
initialized variable "divert_if" as well, so this became the same one as
the one referenced in isdn_common.c. That's why it
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Gerold Jury wrote (in a private message, sorry):
> The machine is single CPU no SMP.
> It hangs with or without X when i hangup the ippp0 interface.
> One of the scripts that run when the line is hung up may do a ifconfig
> ippp0 down afterwards which could be the actual
It works for me.
With and without the divert module loaded.
Thanks a lot
Gerold
Kai Germaschewski wrote:
> I think I found it. Could everybody who was getting the crash on ISDN line
> hangup try if the following patch fixes the problem?
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [...] the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
>
> Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean" before re-building your tree)?
Yep, that works for a modular mga.o (although it also results in
drmlib.a being installed into /lib/modules, which makes
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Gerold Jury wrote:
> I have reversed the patches part by part, the only thing that makes a
> difference is the diversion services.
> The reason for this remains unknown for me.
I think I found it. Could everybody who was getting the crash on ISDN line
hangup try if the
>
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
> > last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
> > the best I can do is make a prerelease.
>
> I just compiled that one into a 1032 kB kernel, and
Sorry for that stupid mistake.
The patches to the isdn part do not make a difference to the kernel hang
that i experienced lately.
When i reversed the patch for the mentioned files i checked the kernel
configuration and noticed that the "diversion services for isdn" where
on, a feature that i
> haven't finished this work yet. With this new work, however, the
> end-user will still load a single module (e.g., tdfx.o), just like now.
> (Loading a single kernel module is a significant win when dealing with
> end users: there is no possibility of version skew or of having two
> modules
On Tue 2 Jan 2001 08:32:45 +1100,
Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 09:39:38 -0800 (PST),
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
> >>
> >> It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
> >> Makefile
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Thorsten Kranzkowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:51:34AM +0100, Gerold Jury wrote:
> > The ISDN changes for the HISAX drivers
> > that came in since test12 have introduced a bug that causes a
> > AIEE-something and a complete kernel hang when i hangup the isdn line.
>
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Matthias Andree wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
> > last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
> > the best I can do is make a prerelease.
>
> I just
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
> last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
> the best I can do is make a prerelease.
I just compiled that one into a 1032 kB kernel, and it failed to be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I'm using the hisax driver too (build in), and it works perfectly for
> me.
I've also seen my machine die on taking down the ippp0 interface
("service isdn stop") - not on hanging up ("isdnctrl hangup ippp0").
I keep forgetting to investigate, because it's extremely
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:51:34AM +0100, Gerold Jury wrote:
> The ISDN changes for the HISAX drivers
> that came in since test12 have introduced a bug that causes a
> AIEE-something and a complete kernel hang when i hangup the isdn line.
> I have reversed the patch for all occurences of
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:51:34AM +0100, Gerold Jury wrote:
The ISDN changes for the HISAX drivers
that came in since test12 have introduced a bug that causes a
AIEE-something and a complete kernel hang when i hangup the isdn line.
I have reversed the patch for all occurences of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'm using the hisax driver too (build in), and it works perfectly for
me.
I've also seen my machine die on taking down the ippp0 interface
("service isdn stop") - not on hanging up ("isdnctrl hangup ippp0").
I keep forgetting to investigate, because it's extremely
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
I just compiled that one into a 1032 kB kernel, and it failed to be
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Matthias Andree wrote:
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
I just compiled that
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Thorsten Kranzkowski wrote:
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:51:34AM +0100, Gerold Jury wrote:
The ISDN changes for the HISAX drivers
that came in since test12 have introduced a bug that causes a
AIEE-something and a complete kernel hang when i hangup the isdn line.
I also
On Tue 2 Jan 2001 08:32:45 +1100,
Keith Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 09:39:38 -0800 (PST),
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
Makefile tweak), but the drm
haven't finished this work yet. With this new work, however, the
end-user will still load a single module (e.g., tdfx.o), just like now.
(Loading a single kernel module is a significant win when dealing with
end users: there is no possibility of version skew or of having two
modules that
Sorry for that stupid mistake.
The patches to the isdn part do not make a difference to the kernel hang
that i experienced lately.
When i reversed the patch for the mentioned files i checked the kernel
configuration and noticed that the "diversion services for isdn" where
on, a feature that i
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
I just compiled that one into a 1032 kB kernel, and it failed
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Gerold Jury wrote:
I have reversed the patches part by part, the only thing that makes a
difference is the diversion services.
The reason for this remains unknown for me.
I think I found it. Could everybody who was getting the crash on ISDN line
hangup try if the
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...] the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean" before re-building your tree)?
Yep, that works for a modular mga.o (although it also results in
drmlib.a being installed into /lib/modules, which makes depmod
It works for me.
With and without the divert module loaded.
Thanks a lot
Gerold
Kai Germaschewski wrote:
I think I found it. Could everybody who was getting the crash on ISDN line
hangup try if the following patch fixes the problem?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Gerold Jury wrote (in a private message, sorry):
The machine is single CPU no SMP.
It hangs with or without X when i hangup the ippp0 interface.
One of the scripts that run when the line is hung up may do a ifconfig
ippp0 down afterwards which could be the actual reason.
The ISDN changes for the HISAX drivers
that came in since test12 have introduced a bug that causes a
AIEE-something and a complete kernel hang when i hangup the isdn line.
I have reversed the patch for all occurences of INIT_LIST_HEAD in the
isdn patch part and it works for me now.
The
On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 09:39:38 -0800 (PST),
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
>>
>> It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
>> Makefile tweak), but the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
>
>Does this fix it for you (do a "make
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
> >
> > It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
> > Makefile tweak), but the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
>
> Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean" before re-building your tree)?
>
>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
> last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
> the best I can do is make a prerelease.
It's even better this way. Now we kick off the new millenium with a new
kernel. :-)
--
On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
>
> It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
> Makefile tweak), but the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean" before re-building your tree)?
Linus
---
On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
Makefile tweak), but the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean" before re-building your tree)?
Linus
---
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
It's even better this way. Now we kick off the new millenium with a new
kernel. :-)
--
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
Makefile tweak), but the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean" before re-building your tree)?
Linus
On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 09:39:38 -0800 (PST),
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1 Jan 2001, Adam Sampson wrote:
It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
Makefile tweak), but the drm modules have unresolved symbols:
Does this fix it for you (do a "make clean"
The ISDN changes for the HISAX drivers
that came in since test12 have introduced a bug that causes a
AIEE-something and a complete kernel hang when i hangup the isdn line.
I have reversed the patch for all occurences of INIT_LIST_HEAD in the
isdn patch part and it works for me now.
The
Eric W. Biederman writes,
>Some arches have separate maintenance but I don't believe alpha is.
>Though I do believe it has a separate mailing list for alpha specific
things,
>to get better signal to noise ratio.
Great! Do you know where I can find more info about it?
--Ray
-
To unsubscribe from
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
> last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
> the best I can do is make a prerelease.
It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
>I want people to test it for a while, and I want to give other
architectures >the chance to catch up with some of the changes
Does that mean that other architectures have separate mailing lists and
kernel source trees? Is that why i've been getting ignored =)?
If so, what are they? I'd really
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
There's a 2.4.0-prerelease out there, and this is basically it. I want
people to test it for a while, and I want to
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
There's a 2.4.0-prerelease out there, and this is basically it. I want
people to test it for a while, and I want to
I want people to test it for a while, and I want to give other
architectures the chance to catch up with some of the changes
Does that mean that other architectures have separate mailing lists and
kernel source trees? Is that why i've been getting ignored =)?
If so, what are they? I'd really
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok. I didn't make 2.4.0 in 2000. Tough. I tried, but we had some
last-minute stuff that needed fixing (ie the dirty page lists etc), and
the best I can do is make a prerelease.
It appears to work (even with the reiserfs patch with the obvious
Makefile
Eric W. Biederman writes,
Some arches have separate maintenance but I don't believe alpha is.
Though I do believe it has a separate mailing list for alpha specific
things,
to get better signal to noise ratio.
Great! Do you know where I can find more info about it?
--Ray
-
To unsubscribe from
54 matches
Mail list logo
