On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 23:26 -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
RSDL appears to be completely deterministic, which is a very strong
virtue.
Yes. That's why RSDL aroused my curiosity big time.
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this, but until then,
there's no reason to hold up
* Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When PM-Timer is available for local APIC timer calibration we can
skip the verification of the calibrated time value. The resulting
error is quite small on a bunch of evaluated platforms and is less
harming than the observed false positives.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:11:57AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On a side note, I wonder how long it's going to take to fix all the
X/client combinations out there.
AIUI X's clients largely access it via libraries X ships, so the X
update will sweep the vast majority of them in one shot. You'll
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 00:25 -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:11:57AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On a side note, I wonder how long it's going to take to fix all the
X/client combinations out there.
AIUI X's clients largely access it via libraries X ships, so
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this, [...]
then we'll first have wait for those X changes to at least be done in a
minimal manner so that they can be tested for real with RSDL. (is it
_really_ due to that? Or will X regress
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm saying that the current scheduler adjusts for interactive loads,
this new one doesn't. I'm seeing interactivity regressions, and
they are not fixed with nice unless nice is used to maximum effect.
I'm saying yes, I can lower my
Corey Hickey wrote:
Hello,
I am experiencing a hard lockup with 2.6.20.1. Whenever the system locks
up, it locks up hard: nothing is printed to the console and the magic
SysRQ key has no effect--the only thing I can do is poke the reset
button. I have reasonable faith in the stability of my
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this, [...]
then we'll first have wait for those X changes to at least be done in a
minimal manner so that they can be tested for real with RSDL. (is it
Hello,
Note that ping is handled in interrupt or softirq context. So something has
locked up. Try without X? Or perhaps attack a serial console/netconsole, and
when it hangs, use Sysrq to dump the process' states.
I already did this
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 07:12:59PM +0200, Marco Costalba wrote:
When changing current menu in search dialog update also main view
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
I've found handy this 'jump to context behaviour.
Please consider for applying.
Looked good - applied.
(sorry for the duplicate Ingo, this time I managed to Repy to All)
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 08:45 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this, [...]
then we'll first have wait for those X changes to at least be
On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 05:35:32AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Some of modpost's warnings are fatal, and some are not. Adopt the
compiler distinction between errors and warnings by calling error()
for fatal diagnostics and warn() for non-fatal ones.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL
Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this, [...]
[...] Or will X regress forever once we switch to RSDL?)
We cannot regress the scheduling of a workload as important as X mixed
with CPU-intense
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 23:44 -0800, David Lang wrote:
why isn't niceing X to -10 an acceptable option?
Xorg's priority is only part of the problem. Every client that needs a
substantial quantity of cpu while a hog is running will also need to be
negative nice, no?
if you overload the box
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 18:34 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:37:35 +1100 Rusty Russell wrote:
diff -r de5618b5e562 arch/x86_64/Kconfig
--- a/arch/x86_64/Kconfig Tue Mar 13 11:41:55 2007 +1100
+++ b/arch/x86_64/Kconfig Tue Mar 13 17:27:05 2007 +1100
@@ -632,8 +632,8 @@
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
I think the suggestion is much simpler. If you convince gcc/binutils to
leave the .reloc section in vmlinux, and make that available to the
kernel itself, then you can scan all the kernel's relocs to find ones
which refer to paravirt_ops, and use those to determine
On 3/16/07, Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Why did you remove all Cced people? Anyway I filtered
some of them out
johann deneux napsal(a):
You are right, the direction in ff_effect is meant to
be an angle.
A dirty solution would be to use the 16 bits as two
8-bits angles.
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
I finally found a dual core box, which survives suspend/resume without
crashing in the middle of nowhere. Sigh, I never figured out from the
code and the bug reports what's going on.
The observed hangs are caused by a stale state transition of the clock
event devices,
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this regression has to be fixed before RSDL can be merged, simply
because it is a pretty negative effect that goes beyond any of the
visible positive improvements that RSDL brings over the current
scheduler. If it is better to fix X, then X
On Saturday 17 March 2007 19:41, Serge Belyshev wrote:
Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Nicholas Miell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this, [...]
[...] Or will X regress forever once we switch to RSDL?)
We cannot regress the scheduling
Len,
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 21:32 -0400, Len Brown wrote:
[ 36.433917] APIC timer disabled due to verification failure.
And NO_HZ is disabled due to that (I get 1000/s timer's interrupts)
I haven't investigated that yet.
It looks like another new test that my hardware fails to
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 20:48 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
The most frustrating part of a discussion of this nature on lkml is that
earlier information in a thread seems to be long forgotten after a few days
and all that is left is the one reporter having a problem.
One? I'm not the only person
Thomas Gleixner schrieb:
I finally found a dual core box, which survives suspend/resume without
crashing in the middle of nowhere. Sigh, I never figured out from the
code and the bug reports what's going on.
The observed hangs are caused by a stale state transition of the clock
event
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:21:32AM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
Comment in release_task() claims that group leader's parent process
is signalled only if it desires so, which is not true.
AFAIS, `if it wants notification' means, it does not ignore its children
via SIG_IGN als handler for
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 21:32 -0400, Len Brown wrote:
On Friday 16 March 2007 19:44, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Maxim,
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 12:30 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
3) Sometimes I get this (once in three boots or so)
[ 36.217405] ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
[ 36.217587]
Rocks and clubs at work (down boy whack, down i say!;).
This is .30 with some targeted unfairness. I seem to be making progress
toward beating it to a bloody but cooperative pulp. It might be
possible to have my cake and eat it too. Likely too ugly to live
though.
top - 11:35:50 up 57 min, 12
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 10:56 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
calibrating APIC timer ...
... lapic delta = 2426884
... PM timer delta = 833908
APIC calibration PIT not consistent with PM Timer: 232ms instead of 100ms
APIC delta adjusted to PM-Timer: 1041737 (2426884)
. delta 1041737
.
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
so it is not at all clear to me that RSDL is indeed an improvement, if
it does not have comparable auto-nice properties.
Wasn't the point of RSDL to get rid of the auto-nice, because it caused
starvation, unpredictable behaviour and other
Heiko Carstens writes:
So you either rearrange the parameters or convert the loff_t's to pointers.
e.g.
asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int mode)
would work even on s390 ;)
... but wouldn't work on 32-bit powerpc. :( We would end up with a
pad argument
On 3/17/07, Mike Snitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the heads up; its good to see that Pekka Enberg's work has
continued. I actually stumbled onto that line of work earlier while
searching for more info on Tigran Aivazian's forced unmount (badfs)
patches:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 10:14:52AM -0800, Don Mullis wrote:
Move tags extracted from the ARCH and include/ sub-trees ahead of
those from device drivers, so that the former will appear first
during searches.
Saves user time during interactive searches for certain patterns
that happen to
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:59:05PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
... but wouldn't work on 32-bit powerpc. :( We would end up with a
pad argument between fd and offset, giving 7 arguments in all
(counting the loff_t's as 2), but we only support 6.
Ditto mips and parisc.
-
To unsubscribe from
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 05:17:04PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
+asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, int mode, loff_t offset, loff_t len)
e.g.
asmlinkage long sys_fallocate(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int mode)
would work even on s390 ;)
How about:
asmlinkage long
On Saturday 17 March 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 23:26 -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
RSDL appears to be completely deterministic, which is a very strong
virtue.
Yes. That's why RSDL aroused my curiosity big time.
The X people have plans for how to go about fixing this,
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Despite the claims to the contrary, RSDL does not have _less_
heuristics, it does not have _any_. It's purely entitlement based.
RSDL still has heuristics very much, but this time it's hardcoded into
the design! Let me demonstrate this via a simple
On Saturday 17 March 2007 22:49, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Despite the claims to the contrary, RSDL does not have _less_
heuristics, it does not have _any_. It's purely entitlement based.
RSDL still has heuristics very much, but this time it's hardcoded into
On Saturday 17 March 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Rocks and clubs at work (down boy whack, down i say!;).
This is .30 with some targeted unfairness. I seem to be making progress
Try -0.31, its better yet.
toward beating it to a bloody but cooperative pulp. It might be
possible to have my cake
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Despite the claims to the contrary, RSDL does not have _less_
heuristics, it does not have _any_. It's purely entitlement based.
RSDL still has heuristics very much, but this time it's hardcoded into
the
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 02:19, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 12:01:13AM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
On Wednesday 07 March 2007 11:02, Nick Piggin wrote:
Yeah, tmpfs/shm segs are what I was thinking about. If UML can live
with that as well, then I think it might be a good
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Con Kolivas:
On Saturday 17 March 2007 22:49, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Despite the claims to the contrary, RSDL does not have _less_
heuristics, it does not have _any_. It's purely entitlement based.
RSDL still has
Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When PM-Timer is available for local APIC timer calibration we can skip
the verification of the calibrated time value. The resulting error is
quite small on a bunch of evaluated platforms and is less harming than
the observed false positives.
Looks
Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
well we can do the handshake to take ownership like we do much later in
boot, but that requires PCI to be there and fully discovered, which we
don't have this early.
That's not true - we do early pci discovery. Doing USB handsoff
there would be
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're obviously disagreeing on what heuristics are [...]
that could very well be so - it would be helpful if you could provide
your own rough definition for the term, so that we can agree on how to
call things?
[ in any case, there's no rush here,
Hello everybody.
I get this bug after suspending to disk twice:
http://m3y3r.de/bilder/Bug-pci_restore_msi_state.png
This happens with current git head cd05a1f818073a623455a58e756c5b419fc98db9.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message
On Saturday 17 March 2007 23:28, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're obviously disagreeing on what heuristics are [...]
that could very well be so - it would be helpful if you could provide
your own rough definition for the term, so that we can agree on how to
* jos poortvliet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
so it is not at all clear to me that RSDL is indeed an improvement,
if it does not have comparable auto-nice properties.
Wasn't the point of RSDL to get rid of the auto-nice, because it
caused
I'm seeing the same here since a few days. Before it worked great (even with
NCQ). I've been getting those messages since 2.6.21-rc3-mm1 and with the
latest Ubuntu feisty kernel (2.6.20-11-generic #2 SMP Thu Mar 15 03:43:56 UTC
2007 x86_64 GNU/Linux)
System is Athlon64 X2, Nforce4, 3x Samsung
On 03/16, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
This means that idle threads (except swapper) are visible to
for_each_process()
and do_each_thread(). Looks dangerous and somewhat strange to me.
Could you explain this change?
David Chinner wrote:
Ok, so an ipsec change. And I see from the history below it
really has nothing to do with this problem. it seems the problem
has something to do with changes between 2.6.19.1 and 2.6.19.2.
indeed. Yesterday at 13:00 I have switched from 2.6.19.1 to 2.6.19.2
(without the
Hi,
The pata_pcmcia driver reports the cmd port is 0x00010100,
but actually the cmd port is 0x0100.
Is this corect?
ata1: PATA max PIO0 cmd 0x00010100 ctl 0x0001010e bmdma 0x irq 3
^ ^
Best Regards
Komuro
-
To unsubscribe
On 3/17/07, Thomas Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everybody.
I get this bug after suspending to disk twice:
http://m3y3r.de/bilder/Bug-pci_restore_msi_state.png
This happens with current git head cd05a1f818073a623455a58e756c5b419fc98db9.
If you know a kernel that works, please
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 18:22:45 + Andy Whitcroft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Following this email are three patches which represent the
current state of the lumpy reclaim patches; collectively lumpy V5.
So where do we stand with this now?Does it make anything get
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 08:05 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
top - 11:35:50 up 57 min, 12 users, load average: 5.20, 4.30, 2.57
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ P COMMAND
6599 root 26 0 174m 30m 8028 R 51 3.1 7:08.70 0 Xorg
7991 root 29 0 18196
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
* jos poortvliet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
so it is not at all clear to me that RSDL is indeed an improvement,
if it does not have comparable auto-nice properties.
Wasn't the point of RSDL
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:34:15 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
I also have noticed that many fast
(16x) DVD writers must have an 80 wire cable or they won't work
correctly and do nasty things to the system.
That was the problem! This is the first machine I bought assembled,
On Saturday 17 March 2007 00:57, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Saturday 17 March 2007 15:40, Al Boldi wrote:
Con Kolivas wrote:
On Saturday 17 March 2007 08:55, Al Boldi wrote:
With X nice'd at -10, and 11 hogs loading the cpu, interactivity looks
good until the default timeslice/quota is
On Saturday 17 March 2007 02:08, Mike Galbraith wrote:
P.S. utter failure was too harsh. What sticks in my craw is that the
world has to adjust to fit this new scheduler.
If a new scheduler has a better 'normal' performance adjusting to its quirks
is fine. Your testing is important. We need
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen)
Subject: Re: MediaGX/GeodeGX1 requires X86_OOSTORE.
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:31:37 -0400
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 02:39:39PM +0900, takada wrote:
Hiroshi Miura posted `Geode out-of-order store enables' patch in Jun, 2003.
There is
On 3/17/07, Mike Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 20:48 +1100, Con Kolivas wrote:
The most frustrating part of a discussion of this nature on lkml is that
earlier information in a thread seems to be long forgotten after a few days
and all that is left is the one
On Saturday 17 March 2007 07:07, jos poortvliet wrote:
Op Saturday 17 March 2007, schreef Ingo Molnar:
so it is not at all clear to me that RSDL is indeed an improvement, if
it does not have comparable auto-nice properties.
Wasn't the point of RSDL to get rid of the auto-nice, because it
Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 03/16, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
This means that idle threads (except swapper) are visible to
for_each_process()
and do_each_thread(). Looks dangerous and somewhat strange
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Con Kolivas wrote:
There are updated patches for 2.6.20, 2.6.20.2, 2.6.21-rc3 and 2.6.21-rc3-mm2
to bring RSDL up to version 0.30 for download here:
Full patches:
http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.20-sched-rsdl-0.30.patch
Mike Galbraith wrote:
If this is your final answer to the problem space, I am done testing,
and as far as _I_ am concerned, your scheduler is an utter failure.
The increased AIM7 throughput (and the other benchmark results)
looked very promising to me.
I wonder what we're doing wrong in the
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 07:09 -0700, Mark Glines wrote:
I don't suppose you can be a bit more specific, and define how much CPU
constitutes a substantial quantity? It looks to me like X already got
about half of a CPU.
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ P COMMAND
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 09:46:27 +0100
Mike Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 23:44 -0800, David Lang wrote:
why isn't niceing X to -10 an acceptable option?
Xorg's priority is only part of the problem. Every client that needs
a substantial quantity of cpu while a hog
[Sam Ravnborg - Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 08:50:33PM +0100]
| On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 01:07:23PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| [Sam Ravnborg - Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 11:45:34PM +0100]
| | On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 10:34:41PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
| |
| | On Mar 10 2007 22:27, Sam Ravnborg
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 10:32 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
Mike Galbraith wrote:
If this is your final answer to the problem space, I am done testing,
and as far as _I_ am concerned, your scheduler is an utter failure.
The increased AIM7 throughput (and the other benchmark results)
looked
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:33:41 +0100
Mike Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ P
COMMAND 6599 root 26 0 174m 30m 8028 R 51 3.1
7:08.70 0 Xorg
This is a snippet from a hacked up by me version of RSDL.30, not
stock.
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 07:54 -0700, Mark Glines wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:33:41 +0100
Mike Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ P
COMMAND 6599 root 26 0 174m 30m 8028 R 51 3.1
7:08.70 0 Xorg
This is a
Kevin Baradon wrote:
Compiling kernel 2.6.21-rc3 gives me the following errors :
LD .tmp_vmlinux1
net/built-in.o: dans la fonction « nfnetlink_parse_nat_proto »:
nf_conntrack_netlink.c:(.text+0x28db9): référence indéfinie vers «
nf_nat_proto_find_get »
[...]
Also occurs with
[Johannes please use replay-to-all to notify all readers]
On 2007-03-17 9:45:36 Johannes Weiner wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:21:32AM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
Comment in release_task() claims that group leader's parent process
is signalled only if it desires so, which is not true.
On 03/17, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--- a/init/main.c~explicitly-set-pgid-and-sid-of-init-process
+++ a/init/main.c
@@ -783,6 +783,7 @@ static int __init init(void * unused)
*/
init_pid_ns.child_reaper =
On 03/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Well the initial kernel process does not have a struct pid so when
it's children start doing:
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_PGID, task_group(p));
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_SID, task_session(p));
We will get an oops.
So far this is the only reason to have
* Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The increased AIM7 throughput (and the other benchmark results) looked
very promising to me.
I wonder what we're doing wrong in the normal scheduler...
there's a relatively easy way to figure out whether it's related to the
interactivity code: try
So in an attempt to summarise the situation, what are the advantages of RSDL
over mainline.
Fairness
why do you think fairness is good, especially always good?
Starvation free
even starvation is sometimes a good thing - there's a place for processes
that only use the CPU if it is otherwise
Hi,
I've written a small patch for more precise process CPU time accounting
for processors with TSC.
Currently, accounting is sample-based and it can be fooled by, for
example, a process that always gives away the rest of it's timeslice.
Instead of a sample-base approach, in this approach I
Komuro wrote:
The pata_pcmcia driver reports the cmd port is 0x00010100,
but actually the cmd port is 0x0100.
Is this corect?
ata1: PATA max PIO0 cmd 0x00010100 ctl 0x0001010e bmdma 0x irq 3
^ ^
It's printing out the
Con Kolivas wrote:
DEF_TIMESLICE is a value used for smp balancing and has no effect on quota
so I doubt you mean that value. The quota you're describing of not
resetting is something like the sleep average idea of current systems
where you accumulate bonus points by sleeping when you would be
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 05:07:06AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 08:59:05PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
... but wouldn't work on 32-bit powerpc. :( We would end up with a
pad argument between fd and offset, giving 7 arguments in all
(counting the loff_t's as 2), but
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:30:43 +0100 Heiko Carstens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sys_sync_file_range(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t nbytes, unsigned int flags)
But from what I read, it's currently not possible for 32-bit powerpc to
wire up the already present sync_file_range system call.
32bit
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:38:38 +1100 Stephen Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:30:43 +0100 Heiko Carstens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sys_sync_file_range(int fd, loff_t offset, loff_t nbytes, unsigned int
flags)
But from what I read, it's currently not possible for
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 08:01:01PM +0530, Amit K. Arora wrote:
Attached below is the patch which implements this system call. It has
been currently implemented and tested on i386, ppc64 and x86_64
architectures. I am facing some problems while trying to implement this
on s390, and thus the
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 22:00:50 +0900
Komuro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
The pata_pcmcia driver reports the cmd port is 0x00010100,
but actually the cmd port is 0x0100.
Is this corect?
When the pci_iomap patches were applied the ports reported for every
device went strange. It appears
As side effect, remove one more -get_info user and a novel approach of content
generation:
sprintf(buf, %sfoo, buf, ...);
sprintf(buf, %sbar, buf, ...);
...
Compile-tested.
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/parisc/kernel/pci-dma.c | 94
On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 07:28:27PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
As side effect, remove one more -get_info user and a novel approach of
content
generation:
snprintf? We don't need no stinkin' snprintf.
applied.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok but please look at how it appears from my end (illness aside).
( i really think we should continue this debate after you get better.
Everything looks much darker when you are ill! )
You initially said you were pleased with this design.
I said
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 10:56 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Maybe I could follow the new logic in apic.c if I saw the apic=debug
output for this box.
calibrating APIC timer ...
... lapic delta = 2426884
... PM timer delta = 833908
APIC calibration PIT not consistent with PM Timer: 232ms
Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 03/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Well the initial kernel process does not have a struct pid so when
it's children start doing:
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_PGID, task_group(p));
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_SID, task_session(p));
We will get an oops.
On Saturday 17 March 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
[...]
Xorg is using 50% cpu because I'm asking it to.
What advantage is that giving you?
-Mike
--
Cheers, Gene
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Ed Howdershelt
Dmitry,
Thanks for you feedback, sorry for the delay on my reply but because
I'm not subscribe to the list, only now I saw your message. I hope you
will be able to see that this message is a follow up on the previous ones.
If you do not mind can you please Cc directly to me.
Now to answer your
On 03/17, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Oleg Nesterov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 03/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Well the initial kernel process does not have a struct pid so when
it's children start doing:
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_PGID, task_group(p));
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_SID,
Tomasz Noiński [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I've written a small patch for more precise process CPU time accounting
for processors with TSC.
Currently, accounting is sample-based and it can be fooled by, for
example, a process that always gives away the rest of it's timeslice.
RDTSC is
Mark Hahn wrote:
So in an attempt to summarise the situation, what are the advantages of RSDL
over mainline.
Fairness
why do you think fairness is good, especially always good?
Starvation free
even starvation is sometimes a good thing - there's a place for processes
that
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of jos poortvliet
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 5:24 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Con Kolivas; Ingo Molnar; Al Boldi; Mike Galbraith;
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Nicholas Miell; Linus Torvalds; Andrew
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 13:03 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Saturday 17 March 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
[...]
Xorg is using 50% cpu because I'm asking it to.
What advantage is that giving you?
It's a test scenario. Read the thread please, I really don't want to
repeat myself endlessly.
On 3/17/07, Mike Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 13:03 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Saturday 17 March 2007, Mike Galbraith wrote:
[...]
Xorg is using 50% cpu because I'm asking it to.
What advantage is that giving you?
It's a test scenario. Read the thread
Begorrah - patches from Irish people on Paddy's day, who would have though it.
Clearly, this patch is full of lucky charms.
On a more serious note, this patch appears to address the page allocation
problem reported by Mariusz Kozlowski.
Changelog since v1
o Select the number of blocks to mark
Pekka Enberg schrieb:
On 3/17/07, Thomas Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everybody.
I get this bug after suspending to disk twice:
http://m3y3r.de/bilder/Bug-pci_restore_msi_state.png
This happens with current git head
cd05a1f818073a623455a58e756c5b419fc98db9.
If you know a kernel
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 19:23 +0100, Kacper Wysocki wrote:
And for Mark and others who are as confused as I was, this is the
thread that Mike meant to reference:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/503455/focus=6614
Nope, with all the back and forth (and noise), I lost track of which
Fix various typos in kernel docs and Kconfigs, 2.6.21-rc4.
Signed-off-by: Matt LaPlante [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
diff -ru a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
--- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig2007-03-17 13:20:34.0 -0400
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig
1 - 100 of 386 matches
Mail list logo
