* Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Subject: Document profile=sleep requiring CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS
>
> profile=sleep only works if CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS is set. This patch notes
> the limitation in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt and prints a
> warning at boot-time if profile=sleep is used
* Mel Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: Document profile=sleep requiring CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS
profile=sleep only works if CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS is set. This patch notes
the limitation in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt and prints a
warning at boot-time if profile=sleep is used
On Friday 05 October 2007 09:32:40 you wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > > cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
> > > >
> > > > Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
> > > > possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been
On Friday 05 October 2007 09:32:40 you wrote:
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
> > >
> > > Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
> > > possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage for years
> > > from
> > cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
> >
> > Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
> > possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage for years
> > from arch/x86_64/boot, and I'm sure there's a handful of scripts
> >
cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage for years
from arch/x86_64/boot, and I'm sure there's a handful of scripts
(other than
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage for years
from arch/x86_64/boot, and I'm sure
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/2/07, Alistair John Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is certainly a tool issue, but if I use Debian's kernel-image
> > "make-kpkg"
> > wrapper around the kernel build system, it fails with:
> >
> > cp: cannot stat
* Alistair John Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 October 2007 04:41:49 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [snip]
> > In other words, people who know they may be affected and would want to
> > prepare can look at (for example)
> >
> >
On 10/4/07, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 08:11:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >...
> > and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
> > might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
> > total shit. You
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 08:11:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>...
> and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
> might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
> total shit. You need to make a gcc bug-report.
>...
Ingo can't send a gcc
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 08:11:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
total shit. You need to make a gcc bug-report.
...
Ingo can't send a gcc
On 10/4/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 08:11:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
...
and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
total shit. You need to
* Alistair John Strachan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 04:41:49 Linus Torvalds wrote:
[snip]
In other words, people who know they may be affected and would want to
prepare can look at (for example)
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/2/07, Alistair John Strachan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is certainly a tool issue, but if I use Debian's kernel-image
make-kpkg
wrapper around the kernel build system, it fails with:
cp: cannot stat
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> I'm a bit confused... you typed 2.6.24-rc4; I'm guessing you meant
> 2.6.24-rc1, but did you mean
No, I just meant "2.6.24 merge window", so:
> "x86 merge as soon as 2.6.23 is released" (merge window opens)
is the correct interpretation.
It
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Doing it as early as possible in the 2.6.24-rc4 series (basically I'll do
it first thing) will mean that we'll have the maximum amount of time to
sort out any issues, and the thing is, Thomas and Ingo already have a tree
ready to go, so people can check their work against
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> >When I'm ruler of the universe, it *will* be illegal. I'm just getting a
> >bit ahead of myself.
>
> Any time frame when that will happen?
I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are.
It turns out to be a non-trivial
On Oct 3 2007 09:09, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>> > and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
>> > might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
>>
>> Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
> > might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
>
> Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are legal, nobody has yet written
> laws about compilers.
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Your compiler generates
> >
> > movl-16(%ebp),%edx
> > movl(%edx),%edi /* this is _totally_ bogus! */
> > incl%edx
> > movl%edx,-16(%ebp)
> > movl
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > - and as a result you get an exception on the *next* page:
> >
> > BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address f2a4
>
> Hm, are you sure? This is a CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=y kernel, so even a
> slight overrun of a
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your compiler generates
>
> movl-16(%ebp),%edx
> movl(%edx),%edi /* this is _totally_ bogus! */
> incl%edx
> movl%edx,-16(%ebp)
> movl%edi,%ecx
> testb %cl,%cl
> je ...
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> - the bug happens on this:
>
> char c = *p++;
>
> - which has been compiled into
>
> 8b 3a mov(%edx),%edi
Btw, this definitely doesn't happen for me, either on x86-64 or plain x86.
The x86 thing I tested was Fedora 8
> and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
> might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are legal, nobody has yet written
laws about compilers. Sorry but I'm forever fixing misuse of the word
El Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió:
> Heh. The "remove sk98lin driver" bullet is sadly wrong. We had to
> reinstate it because it supported some cards that the skge driver doesn't
> handle.
Thanks, fixed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:26:01 +0100
Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 04:08:42PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > Charming... So we get d_path() either returning junk or we get
> > > something that isn't NUL-terminated. Which one it is? I.e. what
> > > does p look like
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
You have a terminally buggy piece of shit compiler.
Lookie here:
- the bug happens on this:
char c = *p++;
- which has been compiled into
8b 3a mov
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 04:08:42PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Charming... So we get d_path() either returning junk or we get
> > something that isn't NUL-terminated. Which one it is? I.e. what does
> > p look like and what's in s?
>
> could be use-after-free as well, as CONFIG_PAGEALLOC
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So there's a final -rc out there, and right now my plan is to make this
> series really short, and release 2.6.23 in a few days. So please do give
> it a last good testing, and holler about any issues you find!
The r8169 nic performance regression is
* Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:46:07AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
> > Config attached. It's easy to reproduce it via 'service sshd restart'.
> > The crash site is:
> >
> > (gdb) list
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:46:07AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
> Config attached. It's easy to reproduce it via 'service sshd restart'.
> The crash site is:
>
> (gdb) list *0xc017599d
> 0xc017599d is in seq_path
On (03/10/07 10:21), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
>
> * Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Nice one Ingo - got it first try. The problem commit was
> > > > dd41f596cda0d7d6e4a8b139ffdfabcefdd46528 and it's clear that the
> > > > code removed in this commit is put back by this
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS=y
it's CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS=y causing the crash.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nodev /debug debugfs rw 0 0
> ) = 290
> read(3, "", 4096) = 0
> close(3)= 0
>
> there's nothing particularly interesting in it. (perhaps debugfs)
disabling debugfs makes the crash go away so
update: occasionally the reading of /proc/mounts succeeds, and it's:
open("/proc/mounts", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3
fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
read(3, "rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0\n/dev/root"..., 4096) = 290
write(1, "rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0\n/dev/root"..., 290rootfs /
hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
Config attached. It's easy to reproduce it via 'service sshd restart'.
The crash site is:
(gdb) list *0xc017599d
0xc017599d is in seq_path (fs/seq_file.c:354).
349 if (m->count < m->size) {
350
* Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Nice one Ingo - got it first try. The problem commit was
> > > dd41f596cda0d7d6e4a8b139ffdfabcefdd46528 and it's clear that the
> > > code removed in this commit is put back by this latest patch.
> > > When applied, profile=sleep works as long as
* Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On (02/10/07 14:15), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
> >
> > * Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Dirt. Booting with "profile=sleep,2" is broken in 2.6.23-rc9 and
> > > 2.6.23-rc8 but working in 2.6.22. I was checking it out as part of a
>
* Mel Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On (02/10/07 14:15), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
* Mel Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dirt. Booting with profile=sleep,2 is broken in 2.6.23-rc9 and
2.6.23-rc8 but working in 2.6.22. I was checking it out as part of a
discussion in
* Mel Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nice one Ingo - got it first try. The problem commit was
dd41f596cda0d7d6e4a8b139ffdfabcefdd46528 and it's clear that the
code removed in this commit is put back by this latest patch.
When applied, profile=sleep works as long as
hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
Config attached. It's easy to reproduce it via 'service sshd restart'.
The crash site is:
(gdb) list *0xc017599d
0xc017599d is in seq_path (fs/seq_file.c:354).
349 if (m-count m-size) {
350
update: occasionally the reading of /proc/mounts succeeds, and it's:
open(/proc/mounts, O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = 3
fstat64(3, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=0, ...}) = 0
read(3, rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0\n/dev/root..., 4096) = 290
write(1, rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0\n/dev/root..., 290rootfs / rootfs
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nodev /debug debugfs rw 0 0
) = 290
read(3, , 4096) = 0
close(3)= 0
there's nothing particularly interesting in it. (perhaps debugfs)
disabling debugfs makes the crash go away so it's debugfs
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS=y
it's CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS=y causing the crash.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
On (03/10/07 10:21), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
* Mel Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nice one Ingo - got it first try. The problem commit was
dd41f596cda0d7d6e4a8b139ffdfabcefdd46528 and it's clear that the
code removed in this commit is put back by this latest patch.
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:46:07AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
Config attached. It's easy to reproduce it via 'service sshd restart'.
The crash site is:
(gdb) list *0xc017599d
0xc017599d is in seq_path
* Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:46:07AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
Config attached. It's easy to reproduce it via 'service sshd restart'.
The crash site is:
(gdb) list *0xc017599d
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
So there's a final -rc out there, and right now my plan is to make this
series really short, and release 2.6.23 in a few days. So please do give
it a last good testing, and holler about any issues you find!
The r8169 nic performance regression is
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 04:08:42PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Charming... So we get d_path() either returning junk or we get
something that isn't NUL-terminated. Which one it is? I.e. what does
p look like and what's in s?
could be use-after-free as well, as CONFIG_PAGEALLOC was
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
hm, i just triggered the procfs crash below with -rc9 on a testbox.
You have a terminally buggy piece of shit compiler.
Lookie here:
- the bug happens on this:
char c = *p++;
- which has been compiled into
8b 3a mov
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:26:01 +0100
Al Viro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 04:08:42PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Charming... So we get d_path() either returning junk or we get
something that isn't NUL-terminated. Which one it is? I.e. what
does p look like and what's
El Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:32:00 -0700 (PDT), Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
Heh. The remove sk98lin driver bullet is sadly wrong. We had to
reinstate it because it supported some cards that the skge driver doesn't
handle.
Thanks, fixed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are legal, nobody has yet written
laws about compilers. Sorry but I'm forever fixing misuse of the word
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
- the bug happens on this:
char c = *p++;
- which has been compiled into
8b 3a mov(%edx),%edi
Btw, this definitely doesn't happen for me, either on x86-64 or plain x86.
The x86 thing I tested was Fedora 8 testing
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your compiler generates
movl-16(%ebp),%edx
movl(%edx),%edi /* this is _totally_ bogus! */
incl%edx
movl%edx,-16(%ebp)
movl%edi,%ecx
testb %cl,%cl
je ...
ah, ok.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
- and as a result you get an exception on the *next* page:
BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address f2a4
Hm, are you sure? This is a CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=y kernel, so even a
slight overrun of a non-NIL
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your compiler generates
movl-16(%ebp),%edx
movl(%edx),%edi /* this is _totally_ bogus! */
incl%edx
movl%edx,-16(%ebp)
movl%edi,%ecx
testb
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are legal, nobody has yet written
laws about compilers. Sorry
On Oct 3 2007 09:09, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
and btw, there is no question what-so-ever about whether your compiler
might be doing a legal optimization - the compiler really is wrong, and is
Pedant: valid. Almost all optimizations are legal, nobody has
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
When I'm ruler of the universe, it *will* be illegal. I'm just getting a
bit ahead of myself.
Any time frame when that will happen?
I'm working on it, I'm working on it. I'm just as frustrated as you are.
It turns out to be a non-trivial
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Doing it as early as possible in the 2.6.24-rc4 series (basically I'll do
it first thing) will mean that we'll have the maximum amount of time to
sort out any issues, and the thing is, Thomas and Ingo already have a tree
ready to go, so people can check their work against
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
I'm a bit confused... you typed 2.6.24-rc4; I'm guessing you meant
2.6.24-rc1, but did you mean
No, I just meant 2.6.24 merge window, so:
x86 merge as soon as 2.6.23 is released (merge window opens)
is the correct interpretation.
It will
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 11:17 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
[...]
> I have uploaded an update of the arch/x86 tree based on -rc9 to
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/linux-2.6-x86.git x86
>
[...]
> If there is anything we can help with the transition, please do not
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 18:09 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On (02/10/07 14:15), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
> >> * Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dirt. Booting with "profile=sleep,2" is broken in 2.6.23-rc9 and
> >>> 2.6.23-rc8 but working in 2.6.22. I was
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Diego Calleja wrote:
>
> Also...if someone dislikes something in http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_23
> ,
> or wants to fix my english, do it soon :)
Heh. The "remove sk98lin driver" bullet is sadly wrong. We had to
reinstate it because it supported some cards that the
El Mon, 1 Oct 2007 20:41:49 -0700 (PDT), Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió:
> So there's a final -rc out there, and right now my plan is to make this
> series really short, and release 2.6.23 in a few days. So please do give
> it a last good testing, and holler about any issues you
On 10/2/07, Alistair John Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is certainly a tool issue, but if I use Debian's kernel-image "make-kpkg"
> wrapper around the kernel build system, it fails with:
>
> cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
>
> Obviously, this file
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 04:41:49 Linus Torvalds wrote:
[snip]
> In other words, people who know they may be affected and would want to
> prepare can look at (for example)
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/linux-2.6-x86.git x86
>
> and generally get ready for the
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 08:41:49PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> I said I was hoping that -rc8 was the last -rc, and I hate doing this, but
> we've had more changes since -rc8 than we had in -rc8. And while most of
> them are pretty trivial, I really couldn't face doing a 2.6.23 release and
John Stoffel wrote:
Linus> I said I was hoping that -rc8 was the last -rc, and I hate
Linus> doing this, but we've had more changes since -rc8 than we had
Linus> in -rc8. And while most of them are pretty trivial, I really
Linus> couldn't face doing a 2.6.23 release and take the risk of some
Mel Gorman wrote:
On (02/10/07 14:15), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
* Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dirt. Booting with "profile=sleep,2" is broken in 2.6.23-rc9 and
2.6.23-rc8 but working in 2.6.22. I was checking it out as part of a
discussion in another thread and noticed it broken
> The one problem with this is that I will have trouble repulling and remerging
> the 81 subsystem tree which are part of -mm until their owners have fixed
> everything up - I'll either need to temporarily drop them or will need to
> fix them up with Thomas's script each time I fetch them.
On Tuesday, 2 October 2007 22:11, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 22:12:13 +0200
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Usage: x86-fixup-patches.py sourcepatch destpatch
> > >
> > > source and dest can be the same.
> > >
> > > A helper script to convert complete
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 22:12:13 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Usage: x86-fixup-patches.py sourcepatch destpatch
> >
> > source and dest can be the same.
> >
> > A helper script to convert complete quilt series is here:
> >
On Tuesday, 2 October 2007 11:17, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
> > merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if you
> > have pending patches for the next
On (02/10/07 14:15), Ingo Molnar didst pronounce:
>
> * Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Dirt. Booting with "profile=sleep,2" is broken in 2.6.23-rc9 and
> > 2.6.23-rc8 but working in 2.6.22. I was checking it out as part of a
> > discussion in another thread and noticed it broken
Linus> I said I was hoping that -rc8 was the last -rc, and I hate
Linus> doing this, but we've had more changes since -rc8 than we had
Linus> in -rc8. And while most of them are pretty trivial, I really
Linus> couldn't face doing a 2.6.23 release and take the risk of some
Linus> really stupid
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 05:30:27PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Sam,
>
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Hi Andi/Ingo.
> >
> > I plan to integrate cflags-probe in kbuild.git if there is no objection.
> > And I will address any x86 issues when I do so.
> > On top of that I will
Sam,
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Andi/Ingo.
>
> I plan to integrate cflags-probe in kbuild.git if there is no objection.
> And I will address any x86 issues when I do so.
> On top of that I will most likely do the same change for i386.
Makes sense. While you are at it, can you
* Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 04:31:15PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Andi, could you please send us the list of patches from the
> > > > current.tar.gz queue above that you consider 2.6.24
>
> I plan to integrate cflags-probe in kbuild.git if there is no objection.
Fine for me. Please take what you want.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
* John Stoffel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Linus> I said I was hoping that -rc8 was the last -rc, and I hate
> Linus> doing this, but we've had more changes since -rc8 than we had
> Linus> in -rc8. And while most of them are pretty trivial, I really
> Linus> couldn't face doing a 2.6.23
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 04:31:15PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Andi, could you please send us the list of patches from the
> > > current.tar.gz queue above that you consider 2.6.24 candidates?
> >
> > Everything in principle except the patches
> please merge it ontop of the arch/x86 tree so that we can start
> reviewing and testing it based on the unified tree ASAP. (but sending us
> a queue to the old layout is fine too - whichever variant you can do
> fastest)
It will be uploaded to the usual location.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe
Linus> I said I was hoping that -rc8 was the last -rc, and I hate
Linus> doing this, but we've had more changes since -rc8 than we had
Linus> in -rc8. And while most of them are pretty trivial, I really
Linus> couldn't face doing a 2.6.23 release and take the risk of some
Linus> really stupid
* Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Andi, could you please send us the list of patches from the
> > current.tar.gz queue above that you consider 2.6.24 candidates?
>
> Everything in principle except the patches marked with TBD.
ok, the ones marked TBD are:
cflags-probe
cpa-clflush
> Andi, could you please send us the list of patches from the
> current.tar.gz queue above that you consider 2.6.24 candidates?
Everything in principle except the patches marked with TBD.
> (and
> please add to the list if there's anything else pending)
I'm still merging/fixing etc. so
* Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Tuesday 02 October 2007 12:37:55 Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:17:02 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > >>> This is also a good time to warn about the fact
* Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dirt. Booting with "profile=sleep,2" is broken in 2.6.23-rc9 and
> 2.6.23-rc8 but working in 2.6.22. I was checking it out as part of a
> discussion in another thread and noticed it broken in -mm as well
> (2.6.23-rc8-mm2). Bisect is in progress but
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Yes I have ~100 patches for arch/x86_64, arch/i386 Should I just drop
> them?
I asuume that Andrew is periodically pulling your queue into -mm, isn't
he? If so, Thomas explicitly stated that -mm can be converted easily with
just a few rejects, right?
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 October 2007 12:37:55 Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:17:02 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >>> This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the
> > >>> x86
> > >>> merge very soon
On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 20:41 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I said I was hoping that -rc8 was the last -rc, and I hate doing this, but
> we've had more changes since -rc8 than we had in -rc8. And while most of
> them are pretty trivial, I really couldn't face doing a 2.6.23 release and
> take
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 12:37:55 Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:17:02 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >>> This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
> >>> merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if
>
Andi Kleen wrote:
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:17:02 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if you
have pending patches for the next series that touch arch/i386 or
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:17:02 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
> > merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if you
> > have pending patches for the next series that touch arch/i386 or x86-64,
> >
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
> merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if you
> have pending patches for the next series that touch arch/i386 or x86-64,
> you should get in touch
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if you
have pending patches for the next series that touch arch/i386 or x86-64,
you should get in touch with
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:17:02 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
This is also a good time to warn about the fact that we're doing the x86
merge very soon (as in the next day or two) after 2.6.23 is out, so if you
have pending patches for the next series that touch arch/i386 or x86-64,
you
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
