On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 01:20:00AM -0400, Scott Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
>
> > This method depends on the change_root() mechanism which I had assumed is
> > becoming obsolete. It works, and there is no need to mess with
> > /proc/sys/kernel/real_root_dev if the
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 01:20:00AM -0400, Scott Murray wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
This method depends on the change_root() mechanism which I had assumed is
becoming obsolete. It works, and there is no need to mess with
/proc/sys/kernel/real_root_dev if the root is
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
> Problem seems to be solved. Here is what I did, for anyone who is interested
> in using a loopback file on a local disk as root:
[snip recipe]
> This method depends on the change_root() mechanism which I had assumed is
> becoming obsolete. It works,
Problem seems to be solved. Here is what I did, for anyone who is interested
in using a loopback file on a local disk as root:
- create a romfs initrd with /linuxrc -> /bin/sh and an empty /initrd dir
- boot, with root=/dev/rd/1 init=/bin/sh
- when /linuxrc comes up, cat /dev/rd/0 > /dev/rd/1
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Erm... You pin the inode down. That makes filesystem busy by any
> > definition I can think of...
>
> Yes. I pulled the pins when I was done with them though.
> (at least I think I did.. been a long time)
Only when you do rd_cleanup().
-
To
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Folks, who the hell is
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Erm... You pin the inode down. That makes filesystem busy by any
> definition I can think of...
That's just because the 2.4.4 code doesn't release it with a blkdev_put.
The fix is in the ac patches.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! (
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > > Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
> > >
> > > That would have
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> >
> > > Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
> >
> > That would have been me. It was simple and needed at the time..
> > feel free to
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> > Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
>
> That would have been me. It was simple and needed at the time..
> feel free to rip it up :)
Mike, I see what you are using it for,
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
That would have been me. It was simple and needed at the time..
feel free to rip it up :)
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
That would have been me. It was simple and needed at the time..
feel free to rip it up :)
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
That would have been me. It was simple and needed at the time..
feel free to rip it up :)
Mike, I see what you are using it for, but you
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
That would have been me. It was simple and needed at the time..
feel free to rip it up :)
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[] idiocy?
That would have been me. It was simple
Alexander Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Erm... You pin the inode down. That makes filesystem busy by any
definition I can think of...
That's just because the 2.4.4 code doesn't release it with a blkdev_put.
The fix is in the ac patches.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! (
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
Folks, who the hell is responsible for rd_inodes[]
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
Erm... You pin the inode down. That makes filesystem busy by any
definition I can think of...
Yes. I pulled the pins when I was done with them though.
(at least I think I did.. been a long time)
Only when you do rd_cleanup().
-
To
Problem seems to be solved. Here is what I did, for anyone who is interested
in using a loopback file on a local disk as root:
- create a romfs initrd with /linuxrc - /bin/sh and an empty /initrd dir
- boot, with root=/dev/rd/1 init=/bin/sh
- when /linuxrc comes up, cat /dev/rd/0 /dev/rd/1
-
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
Problem seems to be solved. Here is what I did, for anyone who is interested
in using a loopback file on a local disk as root:
[snip recipe]
This method depends on the change_root() mechanism which I had assumed is
becoming obsolete. It works, and
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 07:28:14PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:21:23PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > I wrote out the contents of /dev/rd/0 a few times and diff'ed with the
> > uncompressed image of the initrd
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:21:23PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
> I wrote out the contents of /dev/rd/0 a few times and diff'ed with the
> uncompressed image of the initrd on the server. No difference each time. The
> same after digging into swap,
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:21:23PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
>
> > > If you want to keep it until later (i.e. want to destiry it by hands)
> > > mkdir /initrd on your final root and old one will be remounted there.
> > > Again, "Trying to
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
> > If you want to keep it until later (i.e. want to destiry it by hands)
> > mkdir /initrd on your final root and old one will be remounted there.
> > Again, "Trying to unmount old root ... okay" means that it already got
> > an equivalent of
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:05:52PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
>
> > May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: romfs filesystem found at block 0
> > May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: Loading 28216 blocks [1 disk] into ram
>disk...
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
> May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: romfs filesystem found at block 0
> May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: Loading 28216 blocks [1 disk] into ram
>disk... done.
> May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: Freeing initrd memory: 28216k
Hi,
I have continuing problems with getting the initrd ramdisk out of memory once
bootup is complete.
This is with recent -ac kernels which have the fix-up posted a few months ago
applied.
The sequence is roughly:
- boot via pxelinux, loads up bzImage <1MB and root.romfs.gz ~7MB, expands to
Hi,
I have continuing problems with getting the initrd ramdisk out of memory once
bootup is complete.
This is with recent -ac kernels which have the fix-up posted a few months ago
applied.
The sequence is roughly:
- boot via pxelinux, loads up bzImage 1MB and root.romfs.gz ~7MB, expands to
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: romfs filesystem found at block 0
May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: Loading 28216 blocks [1 disk] into ram
disk... done.
May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: Freeing initrd memory: 28216k freed
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:05:52PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: romfs filesystem found at block 0
May 22 09:14:31 wintermute kernel: RAMDISK: Loading 28216 blocks [1 disk] into ram
disk... done.
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
If you want to keep it until later (i.e. want to destiry it by hands)
mkdir /initrd on your final root and old one will be remounted there.
Again, Trying to unmount old root ... okay means that it already got
an equivalent of BKLFLSBUF
Ah,
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:21:23PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
If you want to keep it until later (i.e. want to destiry it by hands)
mkdir /initrd on your final root and old one will be remounted there.
Again, Trying to unmount old root
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:21:23PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
I wrote out the contents of /dev/rd/0 a few times and diff'ed with the
uncompressed image of the initrd on the server. No difference each time. The
same after digging into swap,
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 07:28:14PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Maciek Nowacki wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 06:21:23PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
I wrote out the contents of /dev/rd/0 a few times and diff'ed with the
uncompressed image of the initrd on the
34 matches
Mail list logo
