Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Tetsuo, what do you think?
I don't like blocking SIGKILL while doing operations that depend on memory
allocation by other processes. If the OOM killer is triggered and it chose
the process blocking SIGKILL in mptsas_init() (I know it unlikely happens),
it generates the OOM
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 07:32:16PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 05:29:09PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 03:54:37PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 05:44:10PM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
I'm inclined to agree with
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
kernel-bugzilla.20.drksha...@spamgourmet.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
--- Comment #2 from kernel-bugzilla.20.drksha...@spamgourmet.com ---
Created attachment 130291
-- https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=130291action=edit
Patch to LSI 18.00.00.00 driver to compile on 3.13.6
--
You are receiving this
I haven't gotten many responses so I'm going to try sending again
(this time with a cover letter which I probably should have done in
the first place...)
ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN is currently defined as needed in asm/scatterlist.h.
It was suggested[1] that this should probably be a proper Kconfig.
At
Rather than have architectures #define ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN in an architecture
specific scatterlist.h, make it a proper Kconfig option and use that
instead. At same time, remove the header files are are now mostly
useless and just include asm-generic/scatterlist.h.
Cc: Russell King
On 03/22, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Tetsuo, what do you think?
I don't like blocking SIGKILL while doing operations that depend on memory
allocation by other processes. If the OOM killer is triggered and it chose
the process blocking SIGKILL in mptsas_init() (I know it
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Laura Abbott wrote:
Rather than have architectures #define ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN in an architecture
specific scatterlist.h, make it a proper Kconfig option and use that
instead. At same time, remove the header files are are now mostly
useless and just include
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 20:25 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/22, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Tetsuo, what do you think?
I don't like blocking SIGKILL while doing operations that depend on memory
allocation by other processes. If the OOM killer is triggered and it chose
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/22, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
Many kernel operations (e.g. mutex_lock() wait_event()
wait_for_completion())
ignore SIGKILL and the current users depend on SIGKILL being ignored. Thus,
commit 786235ee sounds like a kernel API breakage.
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 11:13 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
Rather than have architectures #define ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN in an architecture
specific scatterlist.h, make it a proper Kconfig option and use that
instead. At same time, remove the header files are are now mostly
useless and just include
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Personally I dislike this change. In fact I think it is ugly. But this
is only my opinion.
It's not only ugly, it's activly wrong. It's as wrong as 786235ee
itself. And 786235ee needs to be reverted and
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 11:13 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
Rather than have architectures #define ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN in an architecture
specific scatterlist.h, make it a proper Kconfig option and use that
instead. At same time, remove the header files
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 02:31:21PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
Perhaps now might be the time to ask which are the remaining
architectures that cannot do SG chaining and then we can fix them and
pull the whole thing out.
Not quite. You're making the assumption that we can be sure that all
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 22:23 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 02:31:21PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
Perhaps now might be the time to ask which are the remaining
architectures that cannot do SG chaining and then we can fix them and
pull the whole thing out.
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 03:37:40PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 22:23 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 02:31:21PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
Perhaps now might be the time to ask which are the remaining
architectures that cannot do SG
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 22:52 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 03:37:40PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 22:23 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 02:31:21PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
Perhaps now might be the
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 03/22, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Tetsuo, what do you think?
I don't like blocking SIGKILL while doing operations that depend on memory
allocation by other processes. If the OOM killer is triggered and it chose
the process blocking SIGKILL in
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
But then systemd/udev mutters:
You migh be able to work around the timeout with udev rules and
OPTIONS+=event_timeout=120, but that code was maybe never used
or tested, so it might not work correctly. [1]
AFAICT from the ubuntu bug system [2] nobody
diff --git a/arch/arm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/Kconfig
index 1594945..8122294 100644
--- a/arch/arm/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/Kconfig
@@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ config ARM
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/.
config ARM_HAS_SG_CHAIN
+ select ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN
bool
Heh, a self-selecting
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 11:13 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
Rather than have architectures #define ARCH_HAS_SG_CHAIN in an architecture
specific scatterlist.h, make it a proper Kconfig option and use that
instead. At same time, remove the header files are are now mostly
useless and just include
21 matches
Mail list logo
