,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi Hugh,
Thanks by your suggestion. I did not know that kernel 2.4.29 has
changed the statm implementation. As I can see the statm
implementation is different between 2.4 and 2.6.
Let me see if I can use the 2.4.29 statm idea to improve the smaps for
kernel 2.6.11-rc.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Wed
value?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi Brady,
On 7/20/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi,
On 7/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Morton wrote:
OK, please let us know how it goes.
It went very well. I could find no problems at all.
I've updated my script
Hi Christian,
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:09:24 +0100, Christian Kujau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi Christian,
I would like to know what are the kernel versions this problem happened.
Did this problem start from 2.6.11-rc2-bk10?
i noticed it first at 2.6.11, then again
modification is part of 2.6.11 vanilla kernel.
Send the mm/oom_kill.c of 2.6.11-rc3 to me, please. Let me confirm my doubt.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 16:21:21 +0100, Christian Kujau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hallo list,
today my machine went out out memory and noticing it several
Hi Christian,
I found the 2.6.11-rc3 patch. The oom killer modification from
Arcangeli was included in 2.6.11-rc3. Right? So this is correct, so
the problem is not related to Arcangeli modification.
Does anyone have idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 09:18:31 -0400, Mauricio Lin
Hi Christian,
I would like to know what are the kernel versions this problem happened.
Did this problem start from 2.6.11-rc2-bk10?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:12:27 +0100, Christian Kujau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok,
as promised, it the OOM happened again with the same plain
:
+ * 17-Jan-2005
+ * Allan Bezerra
+ * Bruna Moreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Edjard Mota [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Ilias Biris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ *
+ * Embedded Linux Lab - 10LE Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia - INdT
+ *
+ * A new process specific entry (smaps) included
and after the function that executes the
traversing algorithm in order to measure the elapsed time.
Both version (old and new smaps) shows 0 jiffies as elapsed time.
Is it anything wrong? Any idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:13:01 -0400, Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All
Hi Andrew,
But can i use jiffies to measure this kind of performance??? AFAIK, if
it is more efficient, then it is faster, right? How can I know how
fast it is? Any idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 01:09:47 -0800, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mauricio Lin [EMAIL
Hi all,
I tested the two smaps entry using time command.
I tested 100.000 cat commands with smaps for each version.
I checked the difference between the two versions and the new one is
faster than old one. So Hugh is correct about the loop performance.
Thanks!!!
Mauricio Lin.
On Thu, 24 Feb
Hi all,
I comitted a mistake. Indeed the old smaps is still faster than new one.
Take a look:
Old smaps
real 19.52
user 2.15
sys 17.27
New smaps
real 25.93
user 3.19
sys 22.31
Any comments
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:14:36 -0400, Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
will keep using the old
smaps version.
Any suggestion???
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 05:43:05 -0400, Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I comitted a mistake. Indeed the old smaps is still faster than new one.
Take a look:
Old smaps
real 19.52
user 2.15
sys 17.27
New
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:41:31 + (GMT), Hugh Dickins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Now I am testing with /proc/pid/smaps and the values are showing that
the old one is faster than the new one. So I will keep using the old
smaps version.
Sorry, I
Well,
It is working better now. You are right Hugh. Now the new version is
faster than the old one. I removed the struct page and its related
function.
Thanks,
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 04:08:15 -0400, Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:41:31 + (GMT
know any public kernel (I mean kernel version for tracking and
debugging) where can I post the smaps PATCH in order to be included?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http
Hi,
Here are some values about the experiments. The values are the elapsed
real time used by the process, in seconds. Each row corresponds to
1 cat /proc/pid/smaps command.
Old smaps
19.41
19.31
21.38
20.16
New smaps
16.82
16.75
16.75
16.79
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:17:56
= *pte;
address += PAGE_SIZE;
pte++;
if (pte_none(page) || (!pte_present(page)))
continue;
*rss += PAGE_SIZE;
} while (address end);
pte_unmap(pte);
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from
Hi Hugh,
How about map an unmap each pte?
I mean remove the pte++ and use pte_offset_map for each incremented
address and then pte_unmap. So each incremented address is an index to
get the next pte via pte_offset_map.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:07:15 + (GMT), Hugh Dickins
Hi all,
I am sending some modifications about smaps PATCH.
BTW, thanks Hugh by all your suggestions. The page_table_lock was
already included in the smaps.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
diff -uprN linux-2.6.11-rc4-bk9/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
linux-2.6.11-rc4-bk9-smaps/Documentation
lookup too.
* Eventually it should become a filesystem in its own. We don't use the
* rest of procfs anymore.
+ *
+ *
+ * Changelog:
+ * 24-Jan-2005
+ * Allan Bezerra
+ * Bruna Moreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Edjard Mota [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Ilias Biris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Mauricio Lin
accomplish the same test case using malloc program as root and other
graphical applications as normal user?
Let me know about your ideas.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 04:32:19 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:45:13PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi
Hi Thomaz,
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:39:39 +0100, Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 17:13 -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi Andrea,
Your OOM Killer patch was tested and a strange behaviour was found.
Basically as normal user we started some applications
Hi Andrea,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:11:19PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Sometimes the first application to be killed is XFree. AFAIK the
This makes more sense now. You need somebody trapping sigterm in order
Hi Andrea,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:11:19PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Sometimes the first application to be killed is XFree. AFAIK the
This makes more sense now. You need somebody trapping sigterm in order
Hi Andrea,
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:11:29 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 02:54:13PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi Andrea,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:11:19PM -0400
Hi Andrea,
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 09:58:24 -0400, Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Andrea,
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:11:29 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 02:54:13PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi Andrea,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01
Moreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Edjard Mota [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Ilias Biris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ *
+ * Embedded Linux Lab - 10LE Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia - INdT
+ *
+ * A new process specific entry (smaps) included in /proc. It shows the
+ * size of rss
become a filesystem in its own. We don't use the
* rest of procfs anymore.
+ *
+ *
+ * Changelog:
+ * 17-Jan-2005
+ * Allan Bezerra
+ * Bruna Moreira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Edjard Mota [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Ilias Biris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ * Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ *
+ * Embedded
Hi Tosatti,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:30:23 -0200, Marcelo Tosatti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 03:02:14PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi Andrew,
I figured out the error. This patch works for others editors as well.
snip
diff -uprN linux-2.6.10/fs
of __set_current_state function? AFAIK the set_current_state
function is more feasible for SMP systems, right?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 09:38:37 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 01:35:47AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
confirmed fix for this available
it
to complement the kernel decision as necessary. Was it your idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:27:11 -0400, Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Andrea,
I applied your patch and I am checking your code. It is really a very
interesting work. I have a question about the function
Hi Aneesh,
I have posted a patch for that as well. You can check it at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/11/30/315.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On 12/10/06, Aneesh Kumar K.V [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 07:38:01PM +, Mauricio Lin wrote:
Hi Greg,
It is working now
Hi Aneesh,
The patch update sounds good.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On 12/11/06, Aneesh Kumar K.V [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since kobject_uevent() function does not return an integer value to
indicate if its operation was completed with success or not, it is
worth changing it in order to report
in the
mainline kernel? Do you have examples about how can I use your socket
and/or signal notifications to establish kernel and user space
communication?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On 12/11/06, Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Signal notifications.
This type of notifications allows to deliver
, the current way to detect where the error is
taking place in the kobject_uevent() requires additional inclusion of
printk() in each if condition that can lead to failure.
Signed-off-by: Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: kernel/linux-2.6.19-rc6/include/linux/kobject.h
Hi Andrew,
On 12/1/06, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:58:47 -0400
Mauricio Lin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since kobject_uevent() function does not return an integer value to
indicate if its operation was completed with success or not, it is
worth changing
,
pud_range, pmd_range, pte_range levels like 2.4's statm"? Could you
give more details, please?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi Hugh,
Thanks by your suggestion. I did not know that kernel 2.4.29 has
changed the statm implementation. As I can see the statm
implementation is different between 2.4 and 2.6.
Let me see if I can use the 2.4.29 statm idea to improve the smaps for
kernel 2.6.11-rc.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Wed
:
+ * 17-Jan-2005
+ * Allan Bezerra
+ * Bruna Moreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Edjard Mota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Ilias Biris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ *
+ * Embedded Linux Lab - 10LE Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia - INdT
+ *
+ * A new proce
modification is part of 2.6.11 vanilla kernel.
Send the mm/oom_kill.c of 2.6.11-rc3 to me, please. Let me confirm my doubt.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 16:21:21 +0100, Christian Kujau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hallo list,
>
> today my machine went out out memo
Hi Christian,
I found the 2.6.11-rc3 patch. The oom killer modification from
Arcangeli was included in 2.6.11-rc3. Right? So this is correct, so
the problem is not related to Arcangeli modification.
Does anyone have idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 09:18:31 -0400, Mauricio Lin
Hi Christian,
I would like to know what are the kernel versions this problem happened.
Did this problem start from 2.6.11-rc2-bk10?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:12:27 +0100, Christian Kujau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ok,
>
> as "promised",
Hi Christian,
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:09:24 +0100, Christian Kujau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Hi Christian,
> >
> > I would like to know what are the kernel versions this problem happened.
> >
> > Did this problem start from 2
r test case? Could you
accomplish the same test case using malloc program as root and other
graphical applications as normal user?
Let me know about your ideas.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 04:32:19 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 05:45
Hi Thomaz,
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:39:39 +0100, Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 17:13 -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Hi Andrea,
> >
> > Your OOM Killer patch was tested and a strange behaviour was found.
> > Basically as normal
Hi Andrea,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:11:19PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Sometimes the first application to be killed is XFree. AFAIK the
>
> This makes more sense now. You need some
Hi Andrea,
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:11:19PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Sometimes the first application to be killed is XFree. AFAIK the
>
> This makes more sense now. You need some
Hi Andrea,
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:11:29 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 02:54:13PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Hi Andrea,
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:49:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
Hi Andrea,
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 09:58:24 -0400, Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:11:29 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 02:54:13PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> >
and after the function that executes the
traversing algorithm in order to measure the elapsed time.
Both version (old and new smaps) shows 0 jiffies as elapsed time.
Is it anything wrong? Any idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:13:01 -0400, Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&g
Hi Andrew,
But can i use jiffies to measure this kind of performance??? AFAIK, if
it is more efficient, then it is faster, right? How can I know how
fast it is? Any idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 01:09:47 -0800, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mauricio Li
Hi all,
I tested the two smaps entry using time command.
I tested 100.000 cat commands with smaps for each version.
I checked the difference between the two versions and the new one is
faster than old one. So Hugh is correct about the loop performance.
Thanks!!!
Mauricio Lin.
On Thu, 24 Feb
Hi all,
I comitted a mistake. Indeed the old smaps is still faster than new one.
Take a look:
Old smaps
real 19.52
user 2.15
sys 17.27
New smaps
real 25.93
user 3.19
sys 22.31
Any comments
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 11:14:36 -0400, Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
will keep using the old
smaps version.
Any suggestion???
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 05:43:05 -0400, Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I comitted a mistake. Indeed the old smaps is still faster than new one.
>
> Take a look:
>
> Old smaps
>
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:41:31 + (GMT), Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> >
> > Now I am testing with /proc/pid/smaps and the values are showing that
> > the old one is faster than the new one. So I will keep usin
Well,
It is working better now. You are right Hugh. Now the new version is
faster than the old one. I removed the struct page and its related
function.
Thanks,
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 04:08:15 -0400, Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:41
r to the inode number
>
Yes, probably smaps is more feasible for tracking environment. Do you
know any public kernel (I mean kernel version for tracking and
debugging) where can I post the smaps PATCH in order to be included?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Hi,
Here are some values about the experiments. The values are the elapsed
real time used by the process, in seconds. Each row corresponds to
1 cat /proc/pid/smaps command.
Old smaps
19.41
19.31
21.38
20.16
New smaps
16.82
16.75
16.75
16.79
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 10:17:56
pte_t page = *pte;
address += PAGE_SIZE;
pte++;
if (pte_none(page) || (!pte_present(page)))
continue;
*rss += PAGE_SIZE;
} while (address < end);
pte_unmap(pte);
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubs
Hi Hugh,
How about map an unmap each pte?
I mean remove the pte++ and use pte_offset_map for each incremented
address and then pte_unmap. So each incremented address is an index to
get the next pte via pte_offset_map.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:07:15 + (GMT), Hugh Dickins
Hi all,
I am sending some modifications about smaps PATCH.
BTW, thanks Hugh by all your suggestions. The page_table_lock was
already included in the smaps.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
diff -uprN linux-2.6.11-rc4-bk9/Documentation/filesystems/proc.txt
linux-2.6.11-rc4-bk9-smaps/Documentation
How dou you know that 11MB is the correct shared value and the 35MB
is the wrong value?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Hi Brady,
On 7/20/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 7/12/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>
> >>>OK, please let us know how
r space. Furthermore, the current way to detect where the error is
taking place in the kobject_uevent() requires additional inclusion of
printk() in each "if" condition that can lead to failure.
Signed-off-by: Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: kernel/linu
Hi Andrew,
On 12/1/06, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:58:47 -0400
Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since kobject_uevent() function does not return an integer value to
> indicate if its operation was completed with success or not, it i
Moreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Edjard Mota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Ilias Biris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ *
+ * Embedded Linux Lab - 10LE Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia - INdT
+ *
+ * A new process specific entry (smaps) included in /proc
become a filesystem in its own. We don't use the
* rest of procfs anymore.
+ *
+ *
+ * Changelog:
+ * 17-Jan-2005
+ * Allan Bezerra
+ * Bruna Moreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Edjard Mota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Ilias Biris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Mauricio Lin
Hi Tosatti,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:30:23 -0200, Marcelo Tosatti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio,
>
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 03:02:14PM -0400, Mauricio Lin wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > I figured out the error. This patch works for others edit
of __set_current_state function? AFAIK the set_current_state
function is more feasible for SMP systems, right?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 09:38:37 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 01:35:47AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > confirmed fix for
it
to complement the kernel decision as necessary. Was it your idea?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:27:11 -0400, Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Andrea,
>
> I applied your patch and I am checking your code. It is really a very
> interesting work. I hav
;
+ * Ilias Biris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * Mauricio Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ *
+ * Embedded Linux Lab - 10LE Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia - INdT
+ *
+ * A new process specific entry (smaps) included in /proc. It shows the
+ * size of rss for each memory area. The maps entry lacks
Hi Aneesh,
I have posted a patch for that as well. You can check it at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/11/30/315.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On 12/10/06, Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 07:38:01PM +, Mauricio Lin wrote:
&
Hi Aneesh,
The patch update sounds good.
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On 12/11/06, Aneesh Kumar K.V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since kobject_uevent() function does not return an integer value to
indicate if its operation was completed with success or not, it is
worth changing it in order to
in the
mainline kernel? Do you have examples about how can I use your socket
and/or signal notifications to establish kernel and user space
communication?
BR,
Mauricio Lin.
On 12/11/06, Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Signal notifications.
This type of notifications allows to d
76 matches
Mail list logo
