Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: [PATCH] i386: trust the PM-Timer calibration of the local APIC timer

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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.

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread William Lee Irwin III
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Nicholas Miell
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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

Re: 2.6.20.1: reproducible hard lockup (with some configurations)

2007-03-17 Thread Corey Hickey
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread David Lang
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

Re: Linux 2.6.21-rc4

2007-03-17 Thread Mariusz Kozlowski
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

Re: [PATCH 0/1] kconfig: sync main view with search dialog current menu

2007-03-17 Thread Sam Ravnborg
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.

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Nicholas Miell
(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

Re: [PATCH] Distinguish between errors and warnings in modpost

2007-03-17 Thread Sam Ravnborg
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Serge Belyshev
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: CONFIG_REORDER Kconfig help strange sentence.

2007-03-17 Thread Rusty Russell
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 @@

Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravirt ops callsites to make them patchable

2007-03-17 Thread Zachary Amsden
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

Re: FF layer restrictions [Was: [PATCH 1/1] Input: add sensable phantom driver]

2007-03-17 Thread johann deneux
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.

Re: [PATCH] clockevents: Fix suspend/resume to disk hangs

2007-03-17 Thread Milan Broz
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,

[patch] CFS scheduler: Completely Fair Scheduler / CONFIG_SCHED_FAIR

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Con Kolivas
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

Re: [BUG] 2.6.21-rc1,2,3 regressions on my system that I found so far

2007-03-17 Thread Thomas Gleixner
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: [PATCH] clockevents: Fix suspend/resume to disk hangs

2007-03-17 Thread Thomas Meyer
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

Re: [PATCH 2.6.21-rc4] kernel/exit: Fix a comment and code contradiction

2007-03-17 Thread Johannes Weiner
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

Re: [BUG] 2.6.21-rc1,2,3 regressions on my system that I found so far

2007-03-17 Thread Arjan van de Ven
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]

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: [BUG] 2.6.21-rc1,2,3 regressions on my system that I found so far

2007-03-17 Thread Thomas Gleixner
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 .

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread jos poortvliet
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Paul Mackerras
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

Re: forced umount?

2007-03-17 Thread Pekka Enberg
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:

Re: [PATCH] kbuild: move tags from ARCH and include/ ahead of drivers

2007-03-17 Thread Sam Ravnborg
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Matthew Wilcox
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Matthew Wilcox
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Gene Heskett
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,

Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread 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 design! Let me demonstrate this via a simple

Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread 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 heuristics very much, but this time it's hardcoded into

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Gene Heskett
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

Re: [ck] Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread jos poortvliet
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

Re: [patch 4/6] mm: merge populate and nopage into fault (fixes nonlinear)

2007-03-17 Thread Blaisorblade
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

Re: [ck] Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread jos poortvliet
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

Re: [PATCH] i386: trust the PM-Timer calibration of the local APIC timer

2007-03-17 Thread Andi Kleen
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

Re: [BUG] 2.6.21-rc1,2,3 regressions on my system that I found so far

2007-03-17 Thread Andi Kleen
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

Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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,

Bug in pci_restore_msi_state

2007-03-17 Thread Thomas Meyer
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

Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread Con Kolivas
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread 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 to get rid of the auto-nice, because it caused

Re: SATA problems in 2.6.20.3

2007-03-17 Thread Christian
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

Re: + remove-the-likelypid-check-in-copy_process.patch added to -mm tree

2007-03-17 Thread Oleg Nesterov
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?

Re: XFS internal error xfs_da_do_buf(2) at line 2087 of file fs/xfs/xfs_da_btree.c. Caller 0xc01b00bd

2007-03-17 Thread Marco Berizzi
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

[BUG] PATA_PCMCIA cmd port

2007-03-17 Thread Komuro
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

Re: Bug in pci_restore_msi_state

2007-03-17 Thread Pekka Enberg
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

Re: [PATCH 0/3] Lumpy Reclaim V5

2007-03-17 Thread Andy Whitcroft
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread jos poortvliet
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

Re: Conflict between ide and usb?

2007-03-17 Thread John Coppens
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,

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Ed Tomlinson
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Ed Tomlinson
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

Re: MediaGX/GeodeGX1 requires X86_OOSTORE.

2007-03-17 Thread takada
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

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread michael chang
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

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Ed Tomlinson
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

Re: + remove-the-likelypid-check-in-copy_process.patch added to -mm tree

2007-03-17 Thread Eric W. Biederman
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

Re: RSDL v0.30 cpu scheduler for mainline kernels

2007-03-17 Thread Szonyi Calin
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Rik van Riel
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

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mark Glines
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

Re: PROBLEM: Make nenuconfig does not save parameters.

2007-03-17 Thread Cyrill Gorcunov
[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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mark Glines
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.

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

Re: [2.6.21-rc{3,4} problem]: missing dependency on NF_NAT

2007-03-17 Thread Patrick McHardy
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

Re: [PATCH 2.6.21-rc4] kernel/exit: Fix a comment and code contradiction

2007-03-17 Thread Ahmed S. Darwish
[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.

Re: + remove-the-likelypid-check-in-copy_process.patch added to -mm tree

2007-03-17 Thread Oleg Nesterov
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 =

Re: + remove-the-likelypid-check-in-copy_process.patch added to -mm tree

2007-03-17 Thread Oleg Nesterov
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mark Hahn
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

more precise CPU time accounting for x86

2007-03-17 Thread Tomasz Noiński
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

Re: [BUG] PATA_PCMCIA cmd port

2007-03-17 Thread Jeff Garzik
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Al Boldi
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Heiko Carstens
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Stephen Rothwell
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Stephen Rothwell
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

Re: [RFC][PATCH] sys_fallocate() system call

2007-03-17 Thread Russell King
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

libata reports bogus addresses for everything (was PATA_PCMCIA cmd port)

2007-03-17 Thread Alan Cox
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

[PATCH] parisc: convert /proc/gsc/pcxl_dma to seq_file

2007-03-17 Thread Alexey Dobriyan
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

Re: [PATCH] parisc: convert /proc/gsc/pcxl_dma to seq_file

2007-03-17 Thread Kyle McMartin
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

Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread Ingo Molnar
* 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

Re: [BUG] 2.6.21-rc1,2,3 regressions on my system that I found so far

2007-03-17 Thread Thomas Gleixner
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

Re: + remove-the-likelypid-check-in-copy_process.patch added to -mm tree

2007-03-17 Thread Eric W. Biederman
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.

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Gene Heskett
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

Re: New kernel mouse recognition problem

2007-03-17 Thread Victor Fernandes
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

Re: + remove-the-likelypid-check-in-copy_process.patch added to -mm tree

2007-03-17 Thread Oleg Nesterov
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,

Re: more precise CPU time accounting for x86

2007-03-17 Thread Andi Kleen
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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Stephen Clark
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

RE: [ck] Re: is RSDL an unfair scheduler too?

2007-03-17 Thread David Schwartz
-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

Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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.

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Kacper Wysocki
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

[PATCH] Bias the location of pages freed for min_free_kbytes in the same MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES blocks

2007-03-17 Thread Mel Gorman
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

Re: Bug in pci_restore_msi_state

2007-03-17 Thread Thomas Meyer
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

Re: [ck] Re: RSDL v0.31

2007-03-17 Thread Mike Galbraith
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

[PATCH 21-rc4] misc doc and kconfig typos

2007-03-17 Thread Matt LaPlante
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   2   >