It wasn't the kernel.
Many thanks to those who helped me track down this problem.
It seems that the 'C' runtime library was trapping the call
to reboot() which probably should have been _reboot() in
earlier code to prevent this. Anyway, the fix is to call
the kernel directly so it doesn't get
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 04:50:32PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
Can't do it
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 04:50:32PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Jan Harkes wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> >>In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
> >>Can't do it anymore.
> >...
> >>Observe that
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 04:50:32PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
Can't do it anymore.
...
Observe that reboot() returns 0
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 04:50:32PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
Can't do it
It wasn't the kernel.
Many thanks to those who helped me track down this problem.
It seems that the 'C' runtime library was trapping the call
to reboot() which probably should have been _reboot() in
earlier code to prevent this. Anyway, the fix is to call
the kernel directly so it doesn't get
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
Can't do it anymore.
...
Observe that reboot() returns 0 and `strace` understands what
parameters were passed. The result is that,
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:46:20 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
| On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
|
| > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
| >
| > |
| > | In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
|
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
> Can't do it anymore.
...
> Observe that reboot() returns 0 and `strace` understands what
> parameters were passed. The result is that, if I hit Ctl-Alt-Del,
> `init`
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:46:20 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
| On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
|
| > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
| >
| > |
| > | In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| > | Can't do it anymore.
| >
| > What
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|
| In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| Can't do it anymore.
What should disabling C_A_D do?
| Script started on Thu 07 Apr 2005 10:58:11 AM EDT
| [SNIPPED leading
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|
| In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| Can't do it anymore.
What should disabling C_A_D do?
| Script started on Thu 07 Apr 2005 10:58:11 AM EDT
| [SNIPPED leading stuff...]
|
| mprotect(0xb7fe4000,
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|
| In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| Can't do it anymore.
What should disabling C_A_D do?
| Script started on Thu 07 Apr 2005 10:58:11 AM EDT
| [SNIPPED leading stuff...]
|
| mprotect(0xb7fe4000,
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|
| In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| Can't do it anymore.
What should disabling C_A_D do?
| Script started on Thu 07 Apr 2005 10:58:11 AM EDT
| [SNIPPED leading
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:46:20 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
| On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
|
| On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|
| |
| | In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| | Can't do it anymore.
|
| What should
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
Can't do it anymore.
...
Observe that reboot() returns 0 and `strace` understands what
parameters were passed. The result is that, if I hit Ctl-Alt-Del,
`init` will
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:46:20 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
| On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
|
| On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:16:14 -0400 (EDT) Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|
| |
| | In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
| |
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Jan Harkes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 11:16:14AM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
In the not-too distant past, one could disable Ctl-Alt-DEL.
Can't do it anymore.
...
Observe that reboot() returns 0 and `strace` understands what
parameters were passed. The result is that,
On Iau, 2005-03-10 at 09:06, Tupshin Harper wrote:
> Alan...since you disagreed with the earlier characterization of what it
> would take to get into the mainline kernels, could you let us know what
> it would take in your opinion? FWIW, I'm happily using it with a -ac kernel.
It needs some
Alan Cox wrote:
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 22:22, CaT wrote:
Argh! Ok. I guess I shouldn't've just bought the card based on this
driver then so that I could better debug my problems with my promise
cards. 8(
Its good hardware. It does lots of neat things providing you run -ac
anyway. The raid1
On Wednesday 09 March 2005 17:51, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 07:26, CaT wrote:
> > > Carried over from 2.6.10-ac
> >
> > BTW. What's the probability of the ITE driver making it into the stock
> > kernel?
>
> I have given up caring about the base kernel IDE code. I've tried to get
>
On Wednesday 09 March 2005 17:51, Alan Cox wrote:
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 07:26, CaT wrote:
Carried over from 2.6.10-ac
BTW. What's the probability of the ITE driver making it into the stock
kernel?
I have given up caring about the base kernel IDE code. I've tried to get
stuff
Alan Cox wrote:
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 22:22, CaT wrote:
Argh! Ok. I guess I shouldn't've just bought the card based on this
driver then so that I could better debug my problems with my promise
cards. 8(
Its good hardware. It does lots of neat things providing you run -ac
anyway. The raid1
On Iau, 2005-03-10 at 09:06, Tupshin Harper wrote:
Alan...since you disagreed with the earlier characterization of what it
would take to get into the mainline kernels, could you let us know what
it would take in your opinion? FWIW, I'm happily using it with a -ac kernel.
It needs some small
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 22:22, CaT wrote:
> Argh! Ok. I guess I shouldn't've just bought the card based on this
> driver then so that I could better debug my problems with my promise
> cards. 8(
Its good hardware. It does lots of neat things providing you run -ac
anyway. The raid1 performance is
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 05:43:02PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:38:43 +, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 16:26, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > It can be merged if somebody fix it to always force controller into
> > >
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:38:43 +, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 16:26, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > It can be merged if somebody fix it to always force controller into
> > non-RAID mode and remove RAID mode support (which currently
> > does nothing more
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 16:26, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> It can be merged if somebody fix it to always force controller into
> non-RAID mode and remove RAID mode support (which currently
> does nothing more besides complicating the driver and making special
> commands unusable).
Incorrect
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:26:46 +1100, CaT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 09:34:22PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
> > diff should actually apply to either right now.
> >
> > 2.6.11-ac1
> > o Fix jbd race
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 07:26, CaT wrote:
> > Carried over from 2.6.10-ac
>
> BTW. What's the probability of the ITE driver making it into the stock
> kernel?
I have given up caring about the base kernel IDE code. I've tried to get
stuff submitted and failed. I've no plan to waste further time on
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 07:26, CaT wrote:
Carried over from 2.6.10-ac
BTW. What's the probability of the ITE driver making it into the stock
kernel?
I have given up caring about the base kernel IDE code. I've tried to get
stuff submitted and failed. I've no plan to waste further time on it.
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 18:26:46 +1100, CaT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 09:34:22PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
diff should actually apply to either right now.
2.6.11-ac1
o Fix jbd race in ext3
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 16:26, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
It can be merged if somebody fix it to always force controller into
non-RAID mode and remove RAID mode support (which currently
does nothing more besides complicating the driver and making special
commands unusable).
Incorrect
-
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:38:43 +, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 16:26, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
It can be merged if somebody fix it to always force controller into
non-RAID mode and remove RAID mode support (which currently
does nothing more besides
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 05:43:02PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:38:43 +, Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 16:26, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
It can be merged if somebody fix it to always force controller into
non-RAID mode
On Mer, 2005-03-09 at 22:22, CaT wrote:
Argh! Ok. I guess I shouldn't've just bought the card based on this
driver then so that I could better debug my problems with my promise
cards. 8(
Its good hardware. It does lots of neat things providing you run -ac
anyway. The raid1 performance is very
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 09:34:22PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
> diff should actually apply to either right now.
>
> 2.6.11-ac1
> o Fix jbd race in ext3(Stephen Tweedie)
>
> Carried over from
Hi,
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 06:49, Chris Wright wrote:
> Yes, we are intending to pick up bits from -ac (you might have missed
> that in another thread).
There's actually a successor patch to that which I'm just about to get
feedback on here and on ext2-devel. It's higher-risk than the one Alan
Alan Cox wrote:
Functionality
o PWC USB camera driver
o Working ULI526X support (added to base in .11 but broken)
o ATP88x support
o Intelligent misrouted IRQ handlers
o Fix PCI boxes that take minutes IDE probing
o Remove bogus confusing XFree86 keyboard
Alan Cox wrote:
snip
Functionality
o PWC USB camera driver
o Working ULI526X support (added to base in .11 but broken)
o ATP88x support
o Intelligent misrouted IRQ handlers
o Fix PCI boxes that take minutes IDE probing
o Remove bogus confusing XFree86 keyboard
Hi,
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 06:49, Chris Wright wrote:
Yes, we are intending to pick up bits from -ac (you might have missed
that in another thread).
There's actually a successor patch to that which I'm just about to get
feedback on here and on ext2-devel. It's higher-risk than the one Alan
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 09:34:22PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
diff should actually apply to either right now.
2.6.11-ac1
o Fix jbd race in ext3(Stephen Tweedie)
Carried over from 2.6.10-ac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/08/2005 03:49 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Clemens Schwaighofer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>>>2.6.11-ac1
>>>oFix jbd race in ext3(Stephen Tweedie)
>>
>>will that patch actually appear in 2.6.11.2? At least it
* Clemens Schwaighofer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> --On Monday, March 07, 2005 09:34:22 PM + Alan Cox
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
> >diff should actually apply to either right now.
> >
> >2.6.11-ac1
> >oFix
--On Monday, March 07, 2005 09:34:22 PM + Alan Cox
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
diff should actually apply to either right now.
2.6.11-ac1
o Fix jbd race in ext3(Stephen Tweedie)
will
Yes yes yes! It almost seemed that your work on thesis stuff will kill
-ac :(
Thank you!
Indrek
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read
Yes yes yes! It almost seemed that your work on thesis stuff will kill
-ac :(
Thank you!
Indrek
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the
--On Monday, March 07, 2005 09:34:22 PM + Alan Cox
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
diff should actually apply to either right now.
2.6.11-ac1
o Fix jbd race in ext3(Stephen Tweedie)
will that
* Clemens Schwaighofer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
--On Monday, March 07, 2005 09:34:22 PM + Alan Cox
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For a couple of reasons I've not yet merged Greg's 2.6.11.1 yet but this
diff should actually apply to either right now.
2.6.11-ac1
oFix jbd race in ext3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/08/2005 03:49 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
* Clemens Schwaighofer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
2.6.11-ac1
oFix jbd race in ext3(Stephen Tweedie)
will that patch actually appear in 2.6.11.2? At least it looks like a
On Sunday March 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> su den 06.03.2005 Klokka 00:19 (+) skreiv J.A. Magallon:
>
> > static int __init init_nfsd(void)
> > {
> > ...
> > if (proc_mkdir("fs/nfs", NULL)) {
> > struct proc_dir_entry *entry;
> > entry =
su den 06.03.2005 Klokka 00:19 (+) skreiv J.A. Magallon:
> static int __init init_nfsd(void)
> {
> ...
> if (proc_mkdir("fs/nfs", NULL)) {
> struct proc_dir_entry *entry;
> entry = create_proc_entry("fs/nfs/exports", 0, NULL);
> if (entry)
>
On 03.02, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Ok,
> there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
> appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
> checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
>
> So it's now _officially_ all
On 03.02, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok,
there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
So it's now _officially_ all bug-free.
su den 06.03.2005 Klokka 00:19 (+) skreiv J.A. Magallon:
static int __init init_nfsd(void)
{
...
if (proc_mkdir(fs/nfs, NULL)) {
struct proc_dir_entry *entry;
entry = create_proc_entry(fs/nfs/exports, 0, NULL);
if (entry)
entry-proc_fops =
On Sunday March 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
su den 06.03.2005 Klokka 00:19 (+) skreiv J.A. Magallon:
static int __init init_nfsd(void)
{
...
if (proc_mkdir(fs/nfs, NULL)) {
struct proc_dir_entry *entry;
entry = create_proc_entry(fs/nfs/exports, 0, NULL);
Ryan Anderson schrieb am 2005-03-03:
> Is there some reason why
> bk changes -aem -rv2.6.10..+ | shortlog
> isn't sufficient?
For some reason, this omits some changes, perhaps from sibling branches,
I haven't checked.
A similar change however warrants for a huge speedup of the changelog
Ryan Anderson schrieb am 2005-03-03:
Is there some reason why
bk changes -aem -rv2.6.10..+ | shortlog
isn't sufficient?
For some reason, this omits some changes, perhaps from sibling branches,
I haven't checked.
A similar change however warrants for a huge speedup of the changelog
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 07:46:05AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> (In contrast the full ChangeLog was missing because the generation script
> I use is not exactly the smart way, so it's O(slow(n)), where slow is n**3
> or worse, so the log from the last -rc release is fast, but going back all
>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ok,
> there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
> appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
> checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
>
> So it's now _officially_ all bug-free.
At
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:06:36PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> []
> >BUG_ON() and friends are still broken (at least on x86)
> []
> >Freeing unused kernel memory: 244k freed
> >[ cut here ]
> >kernel BUG at :9377!
> >
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
>
> Is the master side a hidden host rather than ftp.kernel.org?
Yes. The private keys etc used to generate the signatures are not on the
public sites, which is what I assume your question _really_ is.
> > (In contrast the full ChangeLog was missing
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
> >
> > ftp.kernel.org:/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6 doesn't seem to carry a crypto
> > signature for the patch, patch-2.6.11.gz.sign
>
> It's there now (along with the ChangeLog).
> The signatures are
Linux 2.6 Compile Statistics (gcc 3.4.1)
Web page with links to complete details:
http://developer.osdl.org/cherry/compile/
Kernel bzImagebzImage bzImage modules bzImage modules
(defconfig) (allno) (allyes) (allyes) (allmod) (allmod)
--- ---
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
>
> ftp.kernel.org:/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6 doesn't seem to carry a crypto
> signature for the patch, patch-2.6.11.gz.sign
It's there now (along with the ChangeLog).
The signatures are automatically generated at the master site, and the
mirroring out
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
[]
BUG_ON() and friends are still broken (at least on x86)
[]
Freeing unused kernel memory: 244k freed
[ cut here ]
kernel BUG at :9377!
~~~
Have you tried compiling with CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y ?
(Looks like
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 12:02:03AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Ok,
> there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
> appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
> checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
>
> So
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
> > appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
> > checkers (like fixed init sections, and some
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
> appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
> checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
ftp.kernel.org:/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 12:02:03AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok,
there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
So it's
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
[]
BUG_ON() and friends are still broken (at least on x86)
[]
Freeing unused kernel memory: 244k freed
[ cut here ]
kernel BUG at bad filename:9377!
~~~
Have you tried compiling with CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y ?
(Looks like
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
ftp.kernel.org:/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6 doesn't seem to carry a crypto
signature for the patch, patch-2.6.11.gz.sign
It's there now (along with the ChangeLog).
The signatures are automatically generated at the master site, and the
mirroring out to
Linux 2.6 Compile Statistics (gcc 3.4.1)
Web page with links to complete details:
http://developer.osdl.org/cherry/compile/
Kernel bzImagebzImage bzImage modules bzImage modules
(defconfig) (allno) (allyes) (allyes) (allmod) (allmod)
--- ---
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
ftp.kernel.org:/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6 doesn't seem to carry a crypto
signature for the patch, patch-2.6.11.gz.sign
It's there now (along with the ChangeLog).
The signatures are automatically
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Matthias Andree wrote:
Is the master side a hidden host rather than ftp.kernel.org?
Yes. The private keys etc used to generate the signatures are not on the
public sites, which is what I assume your question _really_ is.
(In contrast the full ChangeLog was missing
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:06:36PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
[]
BUG_ON() and friends are still broken (at least on x86)
[]
Freeing unused kernel memory: 244k freed
[ cut here ]
kernel BUG at bad filename:9377!
~~~
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok,
there it is. Only small stuff lately - as promised. Shortlog from -rc5
appended, nothing exciting there, mostly some fixes from various code
checkers (like fixed init sections, and some coverity tool finds).
So it's now _officially_ all bug-free.
At least it
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 07:46:05AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
(In contrast the full ChangeLog was missing because the generation script
I use is not exactly the smart way, so it's O(slow(n)), where slow is n**3
or worse, so the log from the last -rc release is fast, but going back all
the
Linux 2.6 Compile Statistics (gcc 3.4.1)
Web page with links to complete details:
http://developer.osdl.org/cherry/compile/
Kernel bzImagebzImage bzImage modules bzImage modules
(defconfig) (allno) (allyes) (allyes) (allmod) (allmod)
--- ---
Linux 2.6 Compile Statistics (gcc 3.4.1)
Web page with links to complete details:
http://developer.osdl.org/cherry/compile/
Kernel bzImagebzImage bzImage modules bzImage modules
(defconfig) (allno) (allyes) (allyes) (allmod) (allmod)
--- ---
On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 04:50:23PM +, Christian Heim wrote:
> Well, i have to setup ISDN here at home, and wanted to use both channels.
> I am able to add the second channel, but then the kernel (at least i think)
> starts to complain.
>
> >17:36:22 kraftwerk Badness in local_bh_enable at
Il Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 06:28:38PM +0100, Marcel Sebek ha scritto:
> > @@ -1164,13 +1164,22 @@
> > current_read_size, *poffset,
> > _read, _read_data);
> >
> > + if (rc == -EAGAIN)
> > +
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 04:44:16PM +0100, Luca wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> > this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
> > give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
>
> The following patch against 2.6.11-rc4 fixes this
Hi Enrico,
> It is possible to include the SIS5595 chip driver to the final
> release?
No, sorry. It's not even in -mm yet (in fact it's even not in Greg's
bk-i2c tree yet). It needs to spend some time (and get some testing) in
-mm before it can go to Linus.
You are still welcome to get the
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
> give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
The following patch against 2.6.11-rc4 fixes this compile time warning:
CC [M] fs/cifs/file.o
fs/cifs/file.c:
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
> give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
The following patch against 2.6.11-rc4 fixes this compile time warning:
fs/cifs/cifssmb.c: In function
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
[...]
> this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
> give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
- dscc4 (patch in Jeff's -netdev)
Apart the fact that the driver crashes on module insertion and is
unusable,
Hello,
It is possible to include the SIS5595 chip driver to the final release?
EnricoB
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
Hello,
It is possible to include the SIS5595 chip driver to the final release?
EnricoB
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
[...]
this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
- dscc4 (patch in Jeff's -netdev)
Apart the fact that the driver crashes on module insertion and is
unusable, users
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
The following patch against 2.6.11-rc4 fixes this compile time warning:
fs/cifs/cifssmb.c: In function
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
The following patch against 2.6.11-rc4 fixes this compile time warning:
CC [M] fs/cifs/file.o
fs/cifs/file.c: In
Hi Enrico,
It is possible to include the SIS5595 chip driver to the final
release?
No, sorry. It's not even in -mm yet (in fact it's even not in Greg's
bk-i2c tree yet). It needs to spend some time (and get some testing) in
-mm before it can go to Linus.
You are still welcome to get the patch
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 04:44:16PM +0100, Luca wrote:
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
this is hopefully the last -rc kernel before the real 2.6.11, so please
give it a whirl, and complain loudly about anything broken.
The following patch against 2.6.11-rc4 fixes this compile
Il Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 06:28:38PM +0100, Marcel Sebek ha scritto:
@@ -1164,13 +1164,22 @@
current_read_size, *poffset,
bytes_read, smb_read_data);
+ if (rc == -EAGAIN)
+ continue;
On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 04:50:23PM +, Christian Heim wrote:
Well, i have to setup ISDN here at home, and wanted to use both channels.
I am able to add the second channel, but then the kernel (at least i think)
starts to complain.
17:36:22 kraftwerk Badness in local_bh_enable at
On Monday 07 February 2005 17:56, Jeffrey E. Hundstad wrote:
> Anders Saaby wrote:
> >Is this system running SMP og UP?
>
> UP
Ouch OK. Then I at least haven't seen it before.
--
Med venlig hilsen - Best regards - Meilleures salutations
Anders Saaby
Systems Engineer
On Monday 07 February 2005 17:56, Jeffrey E. Hundstad wrote:
Anders Saaby wrote:
Is this system running SMP og UP?
UP
Ouch OK. Then I at least haven't seen it before.
--
Med venlig hilsen - Best regards - Meilleures salutations
Anders Saaby
Systems Engineer
1 - 100 of 200 matches
Mail list logo
