Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
>Well, I've found that VM-global patch before, of course. Until now, the > last version was against pre18. Since I do not know the exact rules for > including new things into Alan's tree, I thought that VM-global patch was > already included in pre24. Sorry for my lack of experience. ;-)) I

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread willy tarreau
> "I'm sure" meaning "I didn't test it" ? absolutely, I believed that the driver was *exactly* the same as the previous release which didn't boot and needed the fix, but another fix has been applied and corrected it. Now I think it will work with a clean 2.2.18pre25. Anyway, I left a kernel

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread willy tarreau
> > Bad day, Alan? ;) > Umm no but having people _keep_ sending you do > nothing patches gets annoying after a while ;) Please accept all my apologies, Alan. When I quickly sent you the last patch, I didn't notice that some other broken code had been removed, what I discovered later back home

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Martin Kacer
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: # On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 06:02:57PM +0100, Martin Kacer wrote: # >Is there any chance to get rid of these VMM failures? # You should apply this patch on top of 2.2.18pre25: # ftp://.../VM-global-2.2.18pre25-7.bz2 Well, I've found that

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Philipp Rumpf
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 10:47:46AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > |Bus 0, device 2, function 1: > | Unknown class: Intel OEM MegaRAID Controller (rev 5). > |Medium devsel. Fast back-to-back capable. BIST capable. IRQ 10. Master > Capable. Latency=64. > |Prefetchable 32 bit

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 06:02:57PM +0100, Martin Kacer wrote: >Is there any chance to get rid of these VMM failures? You should apply this patch on top of 2.2.18pre25: ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches/v2.2/2.2.18pre25/VM-global-2.2.18pre25-7.bz2 >

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Martin Kacer
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Alan Cox wrote: # >Is there any chance to get rid of these VMM failures? # By finding them. :-) I am not so familiar with MM in Linux. :^( And do not have enough time for intensive study... Although I would probably like that work... # Are you confident you are

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
>We aplied 2.2.18pre25 patch yesterday hoping it could solve it. The > only difference is that the server reached several hours uptime instead of > 40 minutes (with pre24). After two hours of load between 6.00 and 15.00 > the console was flooded with those unpopular messages ("VM: ..."). The

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
> > Some days I don't know why I bother > Bad day, Alan? ;) Umm no but having people _keep_ sending you do nothing patches gets annoying after a while ;) > reading the patch, it makes sense. It probably does about the same > as Willy's patch, but the "right" way by using pci_resource_start() >

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
> as soon as I can reboot it, I promise I will test the > kernel with and without the patch to be really sure. > but before that, if people who have problems with > megaraid/netraid could give it a try, that would be > cool. Also, it would be nice if people for which the > normal megaraid driver

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Martin Kacer
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Alan Cox wrote: # Ok we believe the VM crash looping printing error messages is now fixed. # Marcelo finally figured it out and my 8Mb 486 has been running 2.2.18pre # with that fix and stably[1]. Unfortunately, I don't think it is fixed. We maintain a heavy loaded

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread willy tarreau
> It doesnt even apply sorry Alan, I think it's because I had to copy/paste it with my mouse under X into my browser (I don't have smtp access here at work), and it applies here with a -12 lines offset... Here it is attached for 2.2.18pre25, but since the raid server is running now (under

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
> my server currently works with that patch, but I'm sure it won't boot anymore > if I apply this 2.2.18pre25 alone. Some days I don't know why I bother > just in case, here it is again. It doesnt even apply > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
> I asked people to explain why it was needed. I am still waiting. It is a > patch that does nothing. I will not put random deep magic into the > kernel. Alan, I replied to you a few weeks ago (pre20 times) when you asked me why I was sending you this patch. (perhaps you didn't receive my

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Willy Tarreau
I asked people to explain why it was needed. I am still waiting. It is a patch that does nothing. I will not put random deep magic into the kernel. Alan, I replied to you a few weeks ago (pre20 times) when you asked me why I was sending you this patch. (perhaps you didn't receive my email).

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
my server currently works with that patch, but I'm sure it won't boot anymore if I apply this 2.2.18pre25 alone. Some days I don't know why I bother just in case, here it is again. It doesnt even apply - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread willy tarreau
It doesnt even apply sorry Alan, I think it's because I had to copy/paste it with my mouse under X into my browser (I don't have smtp access here at work), and it applies here with a -12 lines offset... Here it is attached for 2.2.18pre25, but since the raid server is running now (under

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Martin Kacer
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Alan Cox wrote: # Ok we believe the VM crash looping printing error messages is now fixed. # Marcelo finally figured it out and my 8Mb 486 has been running 2.2.18pre # with that fix and stably[1]. Unfortunately, I don't think it is fixed. We maintain a heavy loaded

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
as soon as I can reboot it, I promise I will test the kernel with and without the patch to be really sure. but before that, if people who have problems with megaraid/netraid could give it a try, that would be cool. Also, it would be nice if people for which the normal megaraid driver works

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
Some days I don't know why I bother Bad day, Alan? ;) Umm no but having people _keep_ sending you do nothing patches gets annoying after a while ;) reading the patch, it makes sense. It probably does about the same as Willy's patch, but the "right" way by using pci_resource_start() which

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
We aplied 2.2.18pre25 patch yesterday hoping it could solve it. The only difference is that the server reached several hours uptime instead of 40 minutes (with pre24). After two hours of load between 6.00 and 15.00 the console was flooded with those unpopular messages ("VM: ..."). The

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Martin Kacer
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Alan Cox wrote: # Is there any chance to get rid of these VMM failures? # By finding them. :-) I am not so familiar with MM in Linux. :^( And do not have enough time for intensive study... Although I would probably like that work... # Are you confident you are

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 06:02:57PM +0100, Martin Kacer wrote: Is there any chance to get rid of these VMM failures? You should apply this patch on top of 2.2.18pre25: ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches/v2.2/2.2.18pre25/VM-global-2.2.18pre25-7.bz2 It

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Philipp Rumpf
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 10:47:46AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: |Bus 0, device 2, function 1: | Unknown class: Intel OEM MegaRAID Controller (rev 5). |Medium devsel. Fast back-to-back capable. BIST capable. IRQ 10. Master Capable. Latency=64. |Prefetchable 32 bit memory at

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread willy tarreau
Bad day, Alan? ;) Umm no but having people _keep_ sending you do nothing patches gets annoying after a while ;) Please accept all my apologies, Alan. When I quickly sent you the last patch, I didn't notice that some other broken code had been removed, what I discovered later back home and

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread willy tarreau
"I'm sure" meaning "I didn't test it" ? absolutely, I believed that the driver was *exactly* the same as the previous release which didn't boot and needed the fix, but another fix has been applied and corrected it. Now I think it will work with a clean 2.2.18pre25. Anyway, I left a kernel

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-08 Thread Alan Cox
Well, I've found that VM-global patch before, of course. Until now, the last version was against pre18. Since I do not know the exact rules for including new things into Alan's tree, I thought that VM-global patch was already included in pre24. Sorry for my lack of experience. ;-)) I

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Linus Torvalds
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Excellent. I've been trying to avoid VM fixes for 2.2.18 to stop stuff getting >muddled together and hard to debug. Running with page aging convinces me that >2.2.19 we need to sort some of the vm issues out badly, and make

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
> (note: the above is outdated so it's not anymore suggested for inclusion of > course) > > I sumbitted most of the not-feature-oriented stuff at pre2 time and I plan to > re-submit after 2.2.18 is released. Excellent. I've been trying to avoid VM fixes for 2.2.18 to stop stuff getting muddled

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 12:27:58AM +, Alan Cox wrote: > The problem is its hard to know which of your patches depend on what, and > the complete set is large to say the least. That's why I use a `proposed' directory that only contains patches that can be applied to your tree, in this case it

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
> Such bug can't generate crashes. Did you ever reproduced crashes on your 8Mb > 486 with 2.2.18pre24? Yes. Every 20 minutes or so quite reliably. With that change it has yet to crash (its actually running that + page aging + another minor tweak so it doesnt return success on page aging until

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 08:03:00PM +, Alan Cox wrote: > > Ok we believe the VM crash looping printing error messages is now fixed. Such bug can't generate crashes. Did you ever reproduced crashes on your 8Mb 486 with 2.2.18pre24? > Marcelo finally figured it out and my 8Mb 486 has been

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
> Megaraid still needs fixing. I sent you the patch twice, so have > other people, but it still isn't fixed. The I asked people to explain why it was needed. I am still waiting. It is a patch that does nothing. I will not put random deep magic into the kernel. I have no reason to believe the

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Miquel van Smoorenburg
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >So I figure this is it for 2.2.18, subject to evidence to the contrary Megaraid still needs fixing. I sent you the patch twice, so have other people, but it still isn't fixed. The megaBase &= PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK; ...

Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
Ok we believe the VM crash looping printing error messages is now fixed. Marcelo finally figured it out and my 8Mb 486 has been running 2.2.18pre with that fix and stably[1]. So I figure this is it for 2.2.18, subject to evidence to the contrary Alan 2.2.18pre25 o Fix tight loop

Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
Ok we believe the VM crash looping printing error messages is now fixed. Marcelo finally figured it out and my 8Mb 486 has been running 2.2.18pre with that fix and stably[1]. So I figure this is it for 2.2.18, subject to evidence to the contrary Alan 2.2.18pre25 o Fix tight loop

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Miquel van Smoorenburg
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I figure this is it for 2.2.18, subject to evidence to the contrary Megaraid still needs fixing. I sent you the patch twice, so have other people, but it still isn't fixed. The megaBase = PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_MASK; ...

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
Megaraid still needs fixing. I sent you the patch twice, so have other people, but it still isn't fixed. The I asked people to explain why it was needed. I am still waiting. It is a patch that does nothing. I will not put random deep magic into the kernel. I have no reason to believe the

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 08:03:00PM +, Alan Cox wrote: Ok we believe the VM crash looping printing error messages is now fixed. Such bug can't generate crashes. Did you ever reproduced crashes on your 8Mb 486 with 2.2.18pre24? Marcelo finally figured it out and my 8Mb 486 has been

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
Such bug can't generate crashes. Did you ever reproduced crashes on your 8Mb 486 with 2.2.18pre24? Yes. Every 20 minutes or so quite reliably. With that change it has yet to crash (its actually running that + page aging + another minor tweak so it doesnt return success on page aging until we

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 12:27:58AM +, Alan Cox wrote: The problem is its hard to know which of your patches depend on what, and the complete set is large to say the least. That's why I use a `proposed' directory that only contains patches that can be applied to your tree, in this case it

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Alan Cox
(note: the above is outdated so it's not anymore suggested for inclusion of course) I sumbitted most of the not-feature-oriented stuff at pre2 time and I plan to re-submit after 2.2.18 is released. Excellent. I've been trying to avoid VM fixes for 2.2.18 to stop stuff getting muddled

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre25

2000-12-07 Thread Linus Torvalds
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excellent. I've been trying to avoid VM fixes for 2.2.18 to stop stuff getting muddled together and hard to debug. Running with page aging convinces me that 2.2.19 we need to sort some of the vm issues out badly, and make it faster