Hi,
-
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 http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hello Jens,
Yes this fixes it.
I'm running 2.4.4-pre4 with only your patch applied.
Greatings,
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19 2001, Arjan Filius wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Same here as reported.
> > restoring lvm.c from 2.4.3 into 2.4.4-pre? "fixes" this. (tested not
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Roberto Nibali wrote:
> A 2.2.x UP-APIC patch would maybe improve things here while under
> heavy load. I'm using such boxes as packetfilters. All quadboards
> get IRQ 11 which is rather nasty considering a possible throughput
> of 40Mbit/s per NIC.
The UP-APIC wouldn't
Al writes:
> I don't think that it's needed - old kernels (up to -CURRENT ;-) will
> simply refuse to mount if ->s_inode_size != 128. Old utilites may be
> trickier, though...
Probably would need an incompat flag for changing the inode size anyways,
so old utilities wouldn't set that anyways.
>
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> This sucks for users of that architecture. Also, though not
> applicable to PA-RISC, it sucks for sub-architecture porters.
> (by sub-architecture I mean: Mac, PReP, PowerCore, BeBox, etc.)
As you said it so eloquently a few paragraphs down:
james rich wrote:
> Hi folks,
> I'm sure many here have read the discussion on lkml about lvm and
> the problems that team is having. As part of that discussion it was said:
I'm not entirely familiar with the issues surrounding lvm development, I know
things
are not in good shape right
Matthew Wilcox writes:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:07:22PM -0600, james rich wrote:
>> Doesn't this seem a little like the problems occurring with lvm right now?
>> A separate tree maintained with the maintainers not wanting others
>> submitting patches that conflict with their particular tree?
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> I should have gotten off my butt and mentioned this... I would prefer a
> patch without the 2.2.x compat stuff. So instead of all that compat
> code, have
> #include "starfire-2.2.h"
> or similar...
>
> And then starfire-2.2.h would only exist
Per-Henrik Persson wrote:
> If i start to use the NIC, like som browsing on the internet i occassionly
> get:
>
> eth0: Too much work at interrupt, IntrStatus=0x0001.
You need the 8139too driver update, from 2.4.4-pre5, 2.4.3-ac7, or
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gkernel/
--
Jeff Garzik
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:07:22PM -0600, james rich wrote:
> Doesn't this seem a little like the problems occurring with lvm right now?
> A separate tree maintained with the maintainers not wanting others
> submitting patches that conflict with their particular tree? It seems
> that any project
Axel Boldt wrote:
>Eric has worked on Configure.help for some time now and I haven't,
>so he will take over official maintenance of that file.
I've also been fixing up Configure.help for a while now, and helped Eric
recently with his huge update patch for Configure.help.
I'd like to be listed
Hi,
I'v been lurking around all archives from this list trying to find an
answer to my problem but with no success so I take the step ant mail it to
this list.
My hardware setup is as following:
Abit BP6, 2xCeleron 366, G400, old Matrox-card, sym53c8xx SCSI, Trident
4DWave NX sound, rtl8139
Hello, Gunther!
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Gunther Mayer wrote:
> > PnPBIOS: Parport found PNPBIOS PNP0401 at io=0378,0778 irq=7 dma=-1
>^^ culprit !
For some reason I'm not getting that message anymore. PnPBIOS is in the
kernel,
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 11:00:09PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > What is the right procedure for doing changes like this? Is "don't
> > touch that tree" a permanent condition, or am I going to get a chance
> > to clean up the global CONFIG_
Hi,
seems that somehow isdn.h changes get lost during the merge.
Following patch fix this and some other minor things.
--
Karsten Keil
SuSE Labs
ISDN development
diff -urN linux-2.4.4p5.org/drivers/isdn/hisax/md5sums.asc
linux/drivers/isdn/hisax/md5sums.asc
---
Double cool then.
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> >
> > 'kay, great, thanks.. I'll put it in and see if things show up again
>
> Guys, it's a known bug, fixed in 2.4.4-pre3. See the change to fs/super.c
> between 2.4.4-pre2 and 2.4.4-pre3 - it's quite small.
>
-
To
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 11:00:09PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> What is the right procedure for doing changes like this? Is "don't
> touch that tree" a permanent condition, or am I going to get a chance
> to clean up the global CONFIG_ namespace after your next merge-down?
Our current status
Hi Everyone,
In stead of Linux, I have a question about
doing a kernel patch to SUN's Solaris.
We are working on a project, and it turns out
we might have to modify the I/O's behavior.
Therefore, we are thinking to put in a kernel patch
to the Solaris OS.
Is there anything we need to consider
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 18:50:34 EDT, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > Remove dead CONFIG_BINFMT_JAVA symbol.
>
> Please don't do this, it just makes merging our patches with Linus harder.
Bother. I've now heard "don't touch that tree!" from you and the ARM
Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> J . A . Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> > > Can you back out the ide-cd changes Jens did and see if that fixes it ?
> >
> > Reverted the changes in ide-cd.[hc], and same result.
>
> You want to back out the stuff from drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c; I backed
> out the
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > No he isnt confused, you are trying to dictate policy.
>>
>> What then *is* the policy?
>
> The policy is not to have policy. It works as well in kernel design as politics.
>
> Alan
>
Since my job is in fact
Vibol Hou wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm using 2.4.4-pre3 and get this message occasionally when the system is
> loaded:
>
> Apr 17 16:10:12 omega kernel: eth0: Too much work in interrupt, status e401.
> Apr 17 16:10:12 omega kernel: eth0: Too much work in interrupt, status e401.
I got that one too,
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > If the new interface can be useful for anything it must allow to
> > implement process-shared POSIX mutexes.
>
> Pardon me the bluntness, but... Why?
Because otherwise there is no reason to even waste a second with this.
At least for me and
J . A . Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> > Can you back out the ide-cd changes Jens did and see if that fixes it ?
>
> Reverted the changes in ide-cd.[hc], and same result.
You want to back out the stuff from drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c; I backed
out the parts of the patch new there to ac10, and
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 18:50:34 EDT, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Remove dead CONFIG_BINFMT_JAVA symbol.
Please don't do this, it just makes merging our patches with Linus harder.
This has already been done in our tree since Feb 1. In fact, please
don't touch anything in the tree which is PA
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This was a project that was never completed. I thought at one point
> of allowing the inode size to be not a power of 2, but if you do that,
> you really want to avoid letting an inode cross a block boundary ---
> for reliability and performance
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Strange, I run "mke2fs -I 192 /dev/hdc2" and do not have a segfault or any
> problems with e2fsck or debugfs on the resulting filesystem. I'm running
> 1.20-WIP, but I don't think anything was changed in this area for some time.
May depend on the
On 19 Apr 2001, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Does attached patch fix it?
>
> Yes.
Jens, I guess we should submit these patches to Alan and Linus
now. This way we'll get a working LVM again.
Waiting for the next official LVM release (and the next set of
Hi,
I tried to compile kernel 2.4.3. with SGI Visual Workstation support
selected.
I got the error as follows:
ld -m elf_i386 -T /usr/src/linux/arch/i386/vmlinux.lds -e stext
arch/i386/kernel/head.o arch/i386/kernel/init_task.o init/main.o
init/version.o \
--start-group \
Dear Sistina:
I know very little about LVM, but from watching earlier projects
in the same situation you're in now, the path you need to follow
seems clear:
Stop using CVS internally for development.
It makes checking in changes without submitting them to
Linus too easy.
To get sync'd
On 19 Apr 2001, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm not interested in re-creating the idiocies of Sys IPC.
>
> I'm not talking about sysv semaphores (couldn't care less). And you
> haven't read any of the mails with examples I sent.
>
> If the new
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> went in, but not other stuff. Also, it doesn't appear that any of the
> LVM changes are making it into the stock kernel, which is basically a
> recepie for disaster.
agreed... after the problematic inclusion of 0.9 into the kernel i
asked on sistina
Ion wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:14:32 +0100 (BST), Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 2.4.3-ac10
> > o Merge Linus 2.4.4pre4
>
> Well, it seems you have backed out my starfire changes when you merged
> Jeff Garzik's changes from 2.4.4pre4. So here's a new version, diff'ed
>
Eric has worked on Configure.help for some time now and I haven't,
so he will take over official maintenance of that file.
The attached patch is against 2.4.3.
Axel
--- linux/MAINTAINERS Mon Mar 26 04:14:20 2001
+++ linux/MAINTAINERS.new Fri Apr 20 03:05:23 2001
@@ -273,8 +273,8 @@
S:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 12:28:09AM +0100, D . W . Howells wrote:
> I benchmarked four different environments:
>
> (1) 2.4.4-pre3 + Andrea's generic rwsem patch
> (2) 2.4.4-pre4 using XADD to implement the rwsems
> (3) same as (2) but with a tweak to make rwsem_wake() less fair
Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does attached patch fix it?
Yes.
--
---. ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper \,---' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:14:32 +0100 (BST), Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2.4.3-ac10
> o Merge Linus 2.4.4pre4
Well, it seems you have backed out my starfire changes when you merged
Jeff Garzik's changes from 2.4.4pre4. So here's a new version, diff'ed
against 2.4.3-ac10, which
AJ writes:
> Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment.
Actually, the whole idea of "trying to get a release out" is part of the
problem. If patches were included into CVS and sent sent to
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
> 'kay, great, thanks.. I'll put it in and see if things show up again
Guys, it's a known bug, fixed in 2.4.4-pre3. See the change to fs/super.c
between 2.4.4-pre2 and 2.4.4-pre3 - it's quite small.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On 04.20 Udo A. Steinberg wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > > Just built 2.4.3-ac10 and got an oops when booting. It tries to detect
> > > the CD and gives the oops.
>
> I'm getting a similar oops with -ac10. I initially thought this might be
> a result of switching to gcc-2.95.3, because -ac9
> - There need to be some arch "hooks" in this mecanism. Some machines
> have the ability (from the arch specific code, by tweaking ASIC bits)
> to remove clock and/or power from selected devices. That mean power
> management can be done even with devices not supporting PCI PM provided
> that
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Just built 2.4.3-ac10 and got an oops when booting. It tries to detect
> > the CD and gives the oops.
I'm getting a similar oops with -ac10. I initially thought this might be
a result of switching to gcc-2.95.3, because -ac9 runs fine when built
with gcc-2.95.2, but if
Hi,
Michael Clark wrote:
>
> An obvious kernel improvement for userspace meters like NeTraMet would
> be to give libpcap's pcap_read a kernel interface that can return more
> than one packet at a time (the libpcap interface has this capability).
It's already there - the turbo packet interface
> > - On SMP, we need some way to stop other CPUs in the scheduler
> > while running the last round of sleep (putting devices to sleep) at least
> > until all IO layers in Linux can properly handle blocking of IO queues
> > while the device sleeps.
>
> I think either Rusty or Anton wrote code
D.W.Howells writes:
> This patch (made against linux-2.4.4-pre4) gets rid of some warnings obtained
> when using the generic rwsem implementation.
Have a look at pre5, this is already fixed.
Later,
David S. Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
Hi guys,
The reiserfs commit thread needs to daemonize. This patch
was actually from Andi Kleen eons ago (but blame me if
it breaks). Please apply.
Against 2.4.3:
--- linux/fs/reiserfs/journal.c Thu Apr 19 14:02:56 2001
+++ linux/fs/reiserfs/journal.c Thu Apr 19 18:11:57 2001
@@ -1814,16
This patch (made against linux-2.4.4-pre4) gets rid of some warnings obtained
when using the generic rwsem implementation.
David
diff -uNr linux-2.4.4-pre4/include/linux/rwsem.h linux/include/linux/rwsem.h
--- linux-2.4.4-pre4/include/linux/rwsem.h Thu Apr 19 22:07:49 2001
+++
On 04.20 Alan Cox wrote:
> > Just built 2.4.3-ac10 and got an oops when booting. It tries to detect
> > the CD and gives the oops.
>
> Can you back out the ide-cd changes Jens did and see if that fixes it ?
>
>
Reverted the changes in ide-cd.[hc], and same result.
Bootlog from ac9:
Uniform
You asked for some benchmarks Andrea, so I've obtained some.
The set of test modules can be found at:
ftp://infradead.org/pub/people/dwh/rwsem-test.tar.bz2
(This also includes rwsem-stat.txt which has a copy of the benchmark results
in as well)
There are six test programs. They can
Hi,
Just built 2.4.3-ac10 and got an oops when booting. It tries to detect
the CD and gives the oops.
Here follows the oops both raw and decoded:
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address
printing eip:
c01bfc7c
pgd entry c0101000:
pmd entry
Remove dead CONFIG_BINFMT_JAVA symbol.
--- arch/cris/config.in 2001/04/18 14:18:58 1.1
+++ arch/cris/config.in 2001/04/18 14:19:11
@@ -18,9 +18,6 @@
bool 'System V IPC' CONFIG_SYSVIPC
tristate 'Kernel support for ELF binaries' CONFIG_BINFMT_ELF
-if [ "$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL" = "y" ]; then
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not interested in re-creating the idiocies of Sys IPC.
I'm not talking about sysv semaphores (couldn't care less). And you
haven't read any of the mails with examples I sent.
If the new interface can be useful for anything it must allow to
Alan Cox wrote:
> > > libc is entitled to, and most definitely does exactly that. Take a look at
> > > things like gethostent, getpwent etc etc.
> >
> > Ehh.. I will bet you $10 USD that if libc allocates the next file
> > descriptor on the first "malloc()" in user space (in order to use the
> >
Hi,
Just to keep people informed (hi Miles!) that since the announcement of
the linux-security-module mailing list, some actual work has come out of
it. Actual working code has been posted, which shows the current state,
and the general model of what people are working toward. This post and
'kay, great, thanks.. I'll put it in and see if things show up again
-
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
On Thu, Apr 19 2001, Jonathan Hudson wrote:
>
> Just rebuilt an old box (Celeron 400) with an aha1542 and SCSI
> CD-ROM. Get the following:
Known bug, on my list, will fix.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 02:56:15PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Brian J. Watson wrote:
>
> > > Unmounting a SCSI disk device succeeded, and yielded:
> > >
> > > Red Hat Linux release 6.2 (Zoot)
> > > Kernel 2.4.3 on a 2-processor i686
> > >
> > > chico login: VFS:
Just rebuilt an old box (Celeron 400) with an aha1542 and SCSI
CD-ROM. Get the following:
(aha1542 as module)
Apr 19 21:22:04 kanga kernel: Configuring Adaptec (SCSI-ID 7) at IO:330, IRQ 10, DMA
priority 6
Apr 19 21:22:04 kanga kernel: scsi0 : Adaptec 1542
Apr 19 21:22:04 kanga
> Unmounting a SCSI disk device succeeded, and yielded:
>
> Red Hat Linux release 6.2 (Zoot)
> Kernel 2.4.3 on a 2-processor i686
>
> chico login: VFS: Busy inodes after unmount. Self-destruct in 5 seconds. Have
> a nice day...
>
This message comes out of kill_super(). I would guess that
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Brian J. Watson wrote:
> > Unmounting a SCSI disk device succeeded, and yielded:
> >
> > Red Hat Linux release 6.2 (Zoot)
> > Kernel 2.4.3 on a 2-processor i686
> >
> > chico login: VFS: Busy inodes after unmount. Self-destruct in 5 seconds. Have
> > a nice day...
> >
>
Alan Cox wrote:
>>As far as getting patches into the stock kernel, we've been sending patches
>>to Linus for over a month now, and none of them have made it in. Maybe
>>someone has some pointers on how we get our code past his filters.
>>
>
> Has it occured to you that some of this might be
On Thu, Apr 19 2001, Arjan Filius wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Same here as reported.
> restoring lvm.c from 2.4.3 into 2.4.4-pre? "fixes" this. (tested not ac's
> kernel)
Does attached patch fix it?
--
Jens Axboe
--- /opt/kernel/linux-2.4.4-pre4/drivers/md/lvm.c Wed Apr 18 14:37:34 2001
+++
Rik van Riel writes:
>[...] Andreas' patches got dropped over and over again and comments
>on the LVM code got refused by the moderators at Sistina ...
"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
-- John Gilmore
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -
On 19 Apr 2001, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > I fail to see how this works across processes.
> >
> > It's up to FS_create() to create whatever shared mapping is needed.
>
> No, the point is that FS_create is *not* the one creating the shared
>
> and upgrade the Linux Kerenl from their original 2.2.16 to 2.2.18. But when
> I compile some modules, it said my kernel is 2.4.0. I check the
> /usr/include/linux/version.h as follows, found that it shows I am using
> Kernel 2.4.0.
No. It shows the headers your C compiler libraries are built
> Are you sure, you can implement SMP-safe, atomic operations (which you need
> for all up()/down() in user space) WITHOUT using privileged
> instructions on ALL archs Linux supports?
You don't need to. For some architectures the semaphore code would always call
into the kernel. For those that
On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:12:28AM +0200, Giuliano Pochini wrote:
>
> My fstab:
>
> /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,user,ro 0 0
> /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdmac hfs noauto,user,ro 0 0
>
> I insert an apple cd (hfs) and mount /mnt/cdmac If I type
> I sent this report to the people indicated below, whose names I got from the
> MAINTAINERS file in the 2.4.3 distribution, but the email address for Mr.
> MacKerras is no longer good and Mr. Chastain wrote me back that he is not
> following 2.4 issues.
Well Keith is on holiday I believe and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I have not yet heard from Mr. Owens.
This does not surprise me, given the content of your email.
> The compiler error message along with the menuconfig-generated
> configuration file are set out in the attached MS Word document.
I have to assume that you're just
On Thursday 19 April 2001 15:03, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19 2001, Stefan Jaschke wrote:
> > OK. I'll check again with 2.4.4-pre4+patches:
> > (1) Mounting the SuSE DVD-ROM (-t iso9660) from /dev/hdc on /dvd and
> > reading from /dvd works. Same for CD-ROMs. I don't have a formatted
>
Hi AJ,
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 02:40:15PM -0500, AJ Lewis wrote:
> The list is now open. I've talked to our admin and he's opening it up.
> Send me e-mail if it doesn't work, 'cause something else is broken.
to me it looks like your reactions are too late.
I suggest you Sistina people accept
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I fail to see how this works across processes.
>
> It's up to FS_create() to create whatever shared mapping is needed.
No, the point is that FS_create is *not* the one creating the shared
mapping. The user is explicitly doing this her/himself.
Jeff Galloway wrote:
>
> I sent this report to the people indicated below, whose names I got from the
> MAINTAINERS file in the 2.4.3 distribution, but the email address for Mr.
> MacKerras is no longer good and Mr. Chastain wrote me back that he is not
> following 2.4 issues.
Hi Jeff,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> For instance, a quick scan of my latest ARM patch reveals:
> src@raistlin:[2]:<1009> grep 'diff.*Config.in' rmk1
> diff -urN linux-orig/drivers/mtd/Config.in linux/drivers/mtd/Config.in
Please could you make sure that whatever changes you have are in my CVS -
I'm
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> The following patch cleans dead symbols out of the defconfigs in the 2.4.4pre4
> source tree. It corrects a typo involving CONFIG_GEN_RTC. Another typo
> involving CONFIG_SOUND_YMPCI doesn't need to be corrected, as the symbol
> is never set in
sounds to me like you have the wrong source in /usr/src/linux there is a
module you can install, or you can do it as I normally would...
obtain kernel source for 2.2.18 from ftp.kernel.org and put it in "/usr/src"
(/pub/linux/kernel/v2.2/linux-2.2.18.tar.bz2)
remove the symlink in /usr/src
"rm
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Andreas Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > However, I'm not sure that your reasoning for removing these is correct.
> > For example, one symbol that I saw was CONFIG_EXT2_CHECK, which is code
> > that used to be enabled in the kernel, but is currently
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:11:56AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > No, this is NOT what the UNIX dogmas are all about.
> >
> > When UNIX says "everything is a file", it really means that "everything is
> > a stream of bytes". Things like magic
Pete Zaitcev writes:
> With that in mind, would the following chage have any ill effects?
> It does not seem to break anything obvious, but I am worried about
> a performance degradation for some retarded benchmark.
>
> diff -u -U 4 linux-2.4.3/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Ingo Oeser wrote:
>
> Are you sure, you can implement SMP-safe, atomic operations (which you need
> for all up()/down() in user space) WITHOUT using privileged
> instructions on ALL archs Linux supports?
Why do you care?
Sure, there are broken architectures out there.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:09:32PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> AJ Lewis wrote:
> > Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> > that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment. It
> > would be stupid to just add everything that comes in
On 19 Apr 2001, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Looks good to me. Anybody want to try this out and test some benchmarks?
>
> I fail to see how this works across processes.
It's up to FS_create() to create whatever shared mapping is needed.
For
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:11:56AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> No, this is NOT what the UNIX dogmas are all about.
>
> When UNIX says "everything is a file", it really means that "everything is
> a stream of bytes". Things like magic operations on file desciptors are
> _anathema_ to UNIX.
Dear all,
I have a question about the kernel used by the RedHat. I am using Redhat 7.0
and upgrade the Linux Kerenl from their original 2.2.16 to 2.2.18. But when
I compile some modules, it said my kernel is 2.4.0. I check the
/usr/include/linux/version.h as follows, found that it shows I am
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 1. for tp_frame_size, I dont want to truncate any data on ethernet, I
> need 1514 bytes, is this the best way to do it and not waste space?
>
> static const int TURBO_FRAME_SIZE=
> TPACKET_ALIGN(TPACKET_ALIGN(sizeof(tpacket_hdr)) +
>
Ingo Oeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are you sure, you can implement SMP-safe, atomic operations (which you need
> for all up()/down() in user space) WITHOUT using privileged
> instructions on ALL archs Linux supports?
Which processors have no such instructions but are SMP-capable?
> How
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:56:52PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Your mail to 'linux-lvm' with the subject
> >
> > Re: [linux-lvm] Re: [repost] Announce: Linux-OpenLVM mailing list
> >
> > Is being held until the list moderator can review
[1.] Segfault reading SCSI MO - System hang while writing
[2.] Hello *
with kernel 2.4.x (actually 2.4.3) i ran into a problem acessing my SCSI MO.
As everything works fine with 2.2.x (actually 19) the problem seems to be new
in the 2.4.x kernel series and therefore you might want to take a
AJ Lewis wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 08:02:50PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>>Well their approach to patches that fix bugs is to reject emails. They've done
>>that to stuff I've reported any many others. So there is a problem. And its
>>kind of hard to discuss a problem when you are being
Hello,
Same here as reported.
restoring lvm.c from 2.4.3 into 2.4.4-pre? "fixes" this. (tested not ac's
kernel)
Greatings,
On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2.4.3-ac4 seems to work great on my test box (UP K6-2 with SCSI
> disk), but 2.4.3-ac6 and 2.4.3-ac7 hang pretty hard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In the long run, it probably makes sense to adjust the algorithms to
> allow for non-power-of-two inode sizes,
If you don't mind, does that imply packing inodes across block
boundaries?
Regards,
Jeff
--
Jeff Garzik | "The universe is like a safe to
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't want nor need file permissions. A program would look like this:
>
> Your example opens/mmaps so has file permissions. Which is what I was asking
There are no permissions on the mutex object. It is the shared memory
which counts. If you would
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 12:26:03PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> In any case all kinds of user-level operations are possible as well
> and all the schemes suggested for dealing with the common case without
> syscalls can be applied here as well.
Are you sure, you can implement SMP-safe, atomic
I sent this report to the people indicated below, whose names I got from the
MAINTAINERS file in the 2.4.3 distribution, but the email address for Mr.
MacKerras is no longer good and Mr. Chastain wrote me back that he is not
following 2.4 issues.
I have not yet heard from Mr. Owens.
Any
úÄÒÁ×ÓÔ×ÕÊÔÅ. âïìøûå, ÞÅÍ ÐÒÏÓÔÏ âåóðìáôîùê èïóôéîç
1. ó÷ïê íáçáúéî. ó÷ïñ óôòáîéþëá.
÷Ù ÈÏÔÉÔÅ áâóïìàôîï âåóðìáôîï ÉÍÅÔØ ÓÏÂÓÔ×ÅÎÎÙÊ, ÐÏÌÎÏÃÅÎÎÙÊ éîôåòîåô- íáçáúéî Ó
ÓÏÂÓÔ×ÅÎÎÙÍ ÕÎÉËÁÌØÎÙÍ ÁÄÒÅÓÏÍ: ÉÍÑ.internetmagazin.ru? âÅÚ ÁÒÅÎÄÙ, ÐÏ ×ÙÂÒÁÎÎÏÍÕ
÷ÁÍÉ
ÛÁÂÌÏÎÕ. ÷ ÔÅÞÅÎÉÉ 10
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 11:05:03AM -0500, Victor Zandy wrote:
>
> We have found that one of our programs can cause system-wide
> corruption of the x86 FPU under 2.2.16 and 2.2.17.
>
> We see this problem on dual 550MHz Xeons with 1GB RAM.
Hm, I started to wonder if this is not somewhat
> I don't want nor need file permissions. A program would look like this:
Your example opens/mmaps so has file permissions. Which is what I was asking
> The shared mem segment can be retrieved in whatever way. The mutex in
> this case is anonymous. Everybody who has access to the shared mem
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan/2.4/
Intermediate diffs are available from
http://www.bzimage.org
You may well need to 'make clean' before building -ac8 as the GDT layout
has changed a little.
2.4.3-ac10
o Merge Linus
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 07:55:20AM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
> Erm... Folks, can ->s_inode_size be not a power of 2? Both
> libext2fs and kernel break in that case.
This was a project that was never completed. I thought at one point
of allowing the inode size to be not a power of 2,
AJ Lewis wrote:
> Ok, the issue here is that we're trying to get a release out and so anything
> that majorly changes the code is getting shunted aside for the moment. It
> would be stupid to just add everything that comes in on the ML without
> review. Linus does the exact same thing. I've
1 - 100 of 551 matches
Mail list logo
