On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 03:03:36PM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 01:37:18PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
This will hopefully help diminish certain
Package: linux-image-2.6.23-rc4-amd64
Version: 2.6.23~rc4-1~experimental.1~snapshot.9433
Followup-For: Bug #438663
see: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=438663
/var/log/dmesg
- = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = -
Linux version 2.6.23-rc4-amd64
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 23:45 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Saturday 01 September 2007 22:54:17 Daniel Walker wrote:
In the case when an nmi gets stucks the endflag stays equal to zero. This
causes the busy looping on other cpus to continue, even tho the nmi test
is done.
On my machine
Andi Kleen wrote:
The second function is redundant?
No, it's a hook we must implement, when CONFIG_PCI_DOMAINS is enabled.
Then the other function is redundant.
No, both functions are required by the interface.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 03:36:08AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.23-rc4/2.6.23-rc4-mm1/
Got these on an i386 build with CONFIG_MODVERSIONS=y ...
WARNING: div64_64
On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
a relatively bad example.
in theory, maybe ... in reality, i really dont think so
the string implementations are spread out over the kernel ... there's
implementations
On 9/1/07, Robin Getz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri 31 Aug 2007 17:22, Mike Frysinger pondered:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
Athanasius wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:38:23PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
You might be able to trigger it without this patch by running
while true; do ss -tn; done while doing ident queries, but
just running the while loop a couple of times in parallel
doesn't seem to trigger it here.
kernel/softlockup.c: In function 'softlockup_tick':
kernel/softlockup.c:125: warning: 'regs' is used uninitialized in this function
So let's fix softlockup-improve-debug-output.patch to actually work,
and do what it claimed in the changelog :-)
Signed-off-by: Satyam Sharma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 03:57:58 +0100
don't forget the ACPI interpreter.
YAProof that bogons follow Boze statistics...
or bugons, then.
Why big minds didn't do rdev-like binary patching of the kernel image
with binary ACPI data? Getting such data in (any) userspace would be the
only thing
- Forwarded message from Bob Beck [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Bob Beck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I respect the GPL immensely, really I do - but I believe this type of
action weakens us all.
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 03:36:08AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.23-rc4/2.6.23-rc4-mm1/
Got these on an i386 build with CONFIG_MODVERSIONS=y ...
WARNING: div64_64
drivers/acpi/tables/tbutils.c: In function 'acpi_tb_parse_root_table':
drivers/acpi/tables/tbutils.c:403:
warning: 'rsdt_address' may be used uninitialized in this function
has been verified to be a bogus warning. Let's just initialize the
variable to zero and shut this up.
Signed-off-by:
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:27:03PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 01:37:18PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yan Seiner wrote:
I'm running into the same issue reported here:
http://readlist.com/lists/vger.kernel.org/linux-kernel/72/361184.html
I am using the ata_piix module. If I read the docs correctly, I should
be able to use ahci as well; I need to rebuild the kernel though (debian
insists on
* Sun, 26 Aug 2007 01:08:28 -0500
* Organization: Boundaries Unlimited
[]
Also here's a symbol, show me a menu containing everything else that is
either required by or enabled by this symbol... That sounds like a more
powerful abstraction, since the previous one is show me everything that
I urge developers to not bait into this and just leave this alone.
Those involved know what they are doing and have a strong team of
attorneys watching their backs. Any *necessary* discussions are be
done privately.
Luis
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:41:12PM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:
- Forwarded message from Bob Beck [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Bob Beck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I respect the GPL immensely, really I do - but I believe this type
of action weakens us all.
As a free software user and developer, the question I have is how come
the Linux community feels that they can take the BSD code that was
reverse-engineered at OpenBSD, and put a more restrictive licence onto
it, such that there will be no possibility of the changes going back
to OpenBSD, given
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 07:29:39PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:27:03PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 01:37:18PM -0400,
Hi,
today I switched from 2.6.22.3 to 2.6.23-rc5 (skipped quite a few -rc
versions due to lack of time), and the box keeps panicking under certain
circumstances. I suspected disk related problems, because: when the box
is up, I usually resume ~10 bittorrent files. When doing this, each
file
On 01/09/07, Luis R. Rodriguez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I urge developers to not bait into this and just leave this alone.
Those involved know what they are doing and have a strong team of
attorneys watching their backs. Any *necessary* discussions are be
done privately.
Err...
I don't
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 05:12:14AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
drivers/acpi/tables/tbutils.c: In function 'acpi_tb_parse_root_table':
drivers/acpi/tables/tbutils.c:403:
warning: 'rsdt_address' may be used uninitialized in this function
has been verified to be a bogus warning. Let's just
I urge developers to not bait into this and just leave this alone.
Those involved know what they are doing and have a strong team of
attorneys watching their backs. Any *necessary* discussions are be
done privately.
Luis
What? when we talk about the ethics of cooperating development
* Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:40:11 +0200
[]
eventhough people often write only when they have something to complain
about, I for once would like to congratulate Matti and David, our mail
admins, for the wonderful job they've done with the spams lately. This
month, I might have seen maybe one or two
On 2007.09.02 02:36:18 +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
* Tue, 31 Jul 2007 23:40:11 +0200
[]
eventhough people often write only when they have something to complain
about, I for once would like to congratulate Matti and David, our mail
admins, for the wonderful job they've done with the spams
When companies have taken our wireless device drivers, many many of
them have given changes and fixes back. Some maybe didn't, but that
is OK.
When Linux took our changes back, they immediately locked the door
against changes moving back, by putting a GPL license on guard.
Why does our brother
* Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:20:57 -0400
[]
Here's a sample of the smoother graphs (creating 20 kernel trees):
http://oss.oracle.com/~mason/seekwatcher/ext3_vs_btrfs_vs_xfs.png
It seems, that making log for XFS on different physical device can
boost performance. Will it be reliable, is a question,
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 05:12:14AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
drivers/acpi/tables/tbutils.c: In function 'acpi_tb_parse_root_table':
drivers/acpi/tables/tbutils.c:403:
warning: 'rsdt_address' may be used uninitialized in this function
has
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 07:29:39PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:27:03PM -0400, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 9/2/07, David Newall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Denis Cheng wrote
+ order = get_bitmask_order(min(max, (unsigned long)UINT_MAX)) - 1;
Why doesn't this clash with the max define, also in linux/kernel.h?
They indeed don't clash,
the cpp included by gcc is intelligent enough, it know the
Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 20:49 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Please send in a fix. If the fix involves making nosharecache the
default, then that is better than making policy decisions like this in the
kernel. The kernel should do what the user asks and not put in
On Sep 1, 2007, at 5:52 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
OK, I begin to understand this, there seem to be three different types
of files changed by Jiri's patch:
1. dual licenced files planned to make GPL-only
2. previously dual licenced files with a too recent version used
planned
to make GPL-only
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 04:05 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
I'm glad to announce a working prototype of the basic algorithm I
already suggested last time.
As I already tried to explain previously CFS has a considerable
algorithmic and computational complexity. This patch should now make it
You miss the whole point of dual licencing:
Sam has stated in the licence that the code can be distributed under the
terms of the BSD licence, or alternatively it can be distributed under
the terms of the GPLv2.
Noone removed Sam's licence.
Sam has offered a choice, and if you
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 02:39:36AM +0200, Bj?rn Steinbrink wrote:
[]
Ehrm, you want everyone who wants to start a new thread to:
- send an email
- await response from the mail server
- send the same email again as a reply to the first one
No. Send a ticket request and then organize
Bob Beck wrote:
I urge developers to not bait into this and just leave this alone.
Those involved know what they are doing and have a strong team of
attorneys watching their backs. Any *necessary* discussions are be
done privately.
Luis
What? when we talk about the ethics of
net/sched/sch_cbq.c: In function 'cbq_enqueue':
net/sched/sch_cbq.c:383: warning: 'ret' may be used uninitialized in this
function
has been verified to be a bogus case. So let's shut it up.
Signed-off-by: Satyam Sharma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
net/sched/sch_cbq.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1
diff -urNp linux-orig/net/core/pktgen.c linux-mod/net/core/pktgen.c
--- linux-orig/net/core/pktgen.c2007-08-31 02:21:01.0 -0400
+++ linux-mod/net/core/pktgen.c 2007-09-01 20:51:22.0 -0400
@@ -111,6 +111,9 @@
*
* 802.1Q/Q-in-Q support by Francesco Fondelli (FF)
[EMAIL
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:36:36PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
When companies have taken our wireless device drivers, many many of
them have given changes and fixes back. Some maybe didn't, but that
is OK.
When Linux took our changes back, they immediately locked the door
against changes
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:02:26PM -0600, Bob Beck wrote:
As a free software user and developer, the question I have is how come
the Linux community feels that they can take the BSD code that was
reverse-engineered at OpenBSD, and put a more restrictive licence onto
it, such that there will be
Jason Dixon wrote:
Once the grantor (Reyk) releases his code under that license, it must
remain. You are free to derive work and redistribute under your
license, but the original copyright and license permission remains
intact. Many other entities (Microsoft, Apple, Sun, etc) have used BSD
On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason Dixon wrote:
Once the grantor (Reyk) releases his code under that license, it must
remain. You are free to derive work and redistribute under your
license, but the original copyright and license permission remains
intact. Many
On 9/1/07, Constantine A. Murenin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason Dixon wrote:
Once the grantor (Reyk) releases his code under that license, it must
remain. You are free to derive work and redistribute under your
license, but the
Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
On 01/09/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason Dixon wrote:
Once the grantor (Reyk) releases his code under that license, it must
remain. You are free to derive work and redistribute under your
license, but the original copyright and license permission
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 02:39:15AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
Tangential, but I've often wondered what are the upsides of keeping
CONFIG_CRYPTO_ALGAPI as a separate config option in the first place? Every
single item in crypto/ ends up selecting it (directly or transitively)
so it makes all
On 01/09/07, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When companies have taken our wireless device drivers, many many of
them have given changes and fixes back. Some maybe didn't, but that
is OK.
When Linux took our changes back, they immediately locked the door
against changes moving back,
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 09:42:54PM -0400, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
We asked SFLC to work with us to make sure that everyone's copyrights
were respected in the right places, and that the licenses various developers
wanted for their copyrights were implemented correctly. The patch I sent
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:36:24PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
On Sep 1, 2007, at 5:52 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
OK, I begin to understand this, there seem to be three different types
of files changed by Jiri's patch:
1. dual licenced files planned to make GPL-only
2. previously dual licenced
Suppose you saw some other variant of *nix that had some code you wanted
to use, but there was a gaping security hole in it. Wouldn't you patch
it before you incorporated it? and would it be your fault if this fix
made the code not work with the original?
We took the code and fixed a gaping
Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Indeed, it's upsetting that people like Luis Rodriguez push for the
lawyers to be involved to (fight?) an open source project. Why, may I
ask?
Is it not self-evident? Legal review is the sane course of action, when
legal issues are the bone of contention.
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 09:58:26PM -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote:
Suppose you saw some other variant of *nix that had some code you wanted
to use, but there was a gaping security hole in it. Wouldn't you patch
it before you incorporated it? and would it be your fault if this fix
made the code
Mike Frysinger wrote:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are not Blackfin specific. case in point,
we're
On Sep 1, 2007, at 9:58 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
Suppose you saw some other variant of *nix that had some code you
wanted to use, but there was a gaping security hole in it. Wouldn't
you patch it before you incorporated it? and would it be your fault
if this fix made the code not work with
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 02:39:15AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
Tangential, but I've often wondered what are the upsides of keeping
CONFIG_CRYPTO_ALGAPI as a separate config option in the first place? Every
single item in crypto/ ends up selecting
Here's the second version of TASK_KILLABLE. A few changes since version 1:
- Don't split up TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE.
TASK_WAKESIGNAL and TASK_LOADAVG were pretty much equivalent, and since
we had to keep __TASK_{UN,}INTERRUPTIBLE anyway, splitting them made
little
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:36:24PM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
On Sep 1, 2007, at 5:52 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
OK, I begin to understand this, there seem to be three different types
of files changed by Jiri's patch:
1. dual licenced files planned to make GPL-only
2. previously dual licenced
Replace the uses of __wake_up_locked with wake_up_locked
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/eventpoll.c | 11 ---
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/eventpoll.c b/fs/eventpoll.c
index 77b9953..72e4cb4 100644
--- a/fs/eventpoll.c
+++
and associated infrastructure such as sync_page_killable and
fatal_signal_pending. Use lock_page_killable in do_generic_mapping_read()
to allow us to kill `cat' of a file on an NFS-mounted filesystem.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/pagemap.h | 14
Set TASK_WAKEKILL for TASK_STOPPED and TASK_TRACED, add TASK_KILLABLE and
use TASK_WAKEKILL in signal_wake_up()
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/sched.h | 22 ++
kernel/signal.c |8
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 12
Use TASK_KILLABLE to allow wait_on_retry_sync_kiocb to return -EINTR.
All callers then check the return value and break out of their loops.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
fs/read_write.c | 17 -
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 10:46:51PM -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Abstracting away direct uses of TASK_ flags allows us to change the
definitions of the task flags more easily.
--- a/kernel/exit.c
+++ b/kernel/exit.c
@@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ static int has_stopped_jobs(struct pid *pgrp)
On 9/1/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want to test that stuff and run it on the current code in the
kernel, how about a kernel module? You could modprobe sanitytest or
something and report to syslog at module load time. And maybe have a
parameter which does something drastic
On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 22:46 -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
*/
if (task == current) return 0;
- if ((task-state != TASK_STOPPED) (task-state !=
TASK_TRACED)) {
+ if (!is_task_stopped_or_traced(task-state)) {
DPRINT((cannot attach to non-stopped
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 03:55:37 +0200, Adrian Bunk said:
Jiri's patch would have wrongly not only removed the BSD statement from
dual licenced files but also from not dual licenced files.
This was a mistake in this patch (that was never merged into the tree)
neither Jiri nor Alan noticed.
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 08:22:42AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
So what finally got exported out of crypto/ to the rest of the kernel
was just the crypto_alloc_xxx() wrapper. That resolves to a call to
crypto_alloc_base() in crypto/api.c, which first loads the specific
low-level algo modules,
On Sat, 01 Sep 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Shane wrote:
Just wondering if there is a newer version of intel-rng out
of tree or whether modern Intel chipsets have a usable RNG. I haven't been
able to get intel-rng loading (no such
device) on anything from the p965, p975 or p35 chipsets.
No
Patrick McHardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. I'm not sure either, it would require two concurrent requests
to be processed, but AFAICS oidentd only uses a single netlink socket.
Perhaps multiple running instances or something else using the inet_diag
interface?
Since identd serves
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:35:06PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
Does it take task-state or task ?
task. Clearly I didn't test on ia64. (There was an iteration where it
took task-state, and I guess I missed one). Thanks for pointing out
this oops, I'll fix it for round three.
--
Intel are
On 2007-09-01 16:07:48 Torsten Kaiser wrote:
[...]
The good:
+hpet-force-enable-on-vt8235-37-chipsets.patch
+hpet-force-enable-on-vt8235-37-chipsets-fix.patch
Kernel 2.6.23-rc4-mm1 works on one of my systems with:
00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8385 [K8T800 AGP] Host
Bridge
Christian Kujau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
today I switched from 2.6.22.3 to 2.6.23-rc5 (skipped quite a few -rc
versions due to lack of time), and the box keeps panicking under certain
circumstances. I suspected disk related problems, because: when the box
is up, I usually resume ~10
On Friday 31 August 2007 14:41, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:20:35PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote:
Resubmitting a bio or submitting a dependent bio from
inside a block driver does not need to be throttled because all
resources required to guarantee completion must
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0039 RIP:
[803b6f7c] tcp_rto_min+0xc/0x20
tcp_rto_min() lacks a check-for-NULL. You want 5c127c58ae9bf196 from
the net-2.6.git tree -- so this will be gone in -rc6.
P.S.:
Signed-off-by: Denis Cheng [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
net/ipv4/af_inet.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c b/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
index e681034..d5e8b67 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
@@ -939,7 +939,7 @@ static struct
On 01/09/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 03:55:37 +0200, Adrian Bunk said:
Jiri's patch would have wrongly not only removed the BSD statement from
dual licenced files but also from not dual licenced files.
This was a mistake in this patch (that was
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Denis Cheng wrote:
Signed-off-by: Denis Cheng [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
net/ipv4/af_inet.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c b/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
index e681034..d5e8b67 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
+++
From: Satyam Sharma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 06:24:29AM +0530
The dmesg you posted below doesn't cover the messages from this oops
itself. As you mentioned you can reproduce this oops easily, please do so,
and post the *full* oops log (if it doesn't get logged to disk, you
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 01:09:18 EDT, Constantine A. Murenin said:
The idea here is that no patching was needed in the first place --
most of the files are/were BSD-licensed, because they were forked from
OpenBSD.
Oh, silly me. For some reason, I had it in my head that Jiri's original
patch
401 - 478 of 478 matches
Mail list logo
