Re: [PATCH] drivers/base: export gpl (un)register_memory_notifier

On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 09:12 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: .. - Use currently other not exported functions in kernel/resource.c, like walk_memory_resource (where we would still need the maximum possible number of pages NR_MEM_SECTIONS) It isn't the act of exporting that's the

Re: [PATCH] drivers/base: export (un)register_memory_notifier

remove support and generic __remove_pages() support. If this is blocking your work, lets get this in. Acked-by: Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Badari -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info

[PATCH] ip_gra_reasm() should set err incase of skb_clone() failure

Simple error handling fix (against 2.26.23-git12). Thanks, Badari Need to initialize err in case of skb_clone() failure. net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c: In function `ip_defrag': net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c:540: warning: `err' might be used uninitialized in this function Signed-off-by: Badari Pulavarty

[PATCH] vortex_up should initialize err

Simple compile warning fix. (against 2.6.23-git12) Thanks, Badari vortex_up() should initialize 'err' for a successful return. drivers/net/3c59x.c: In function `vortex_up': drivers/net/3c59x.c:1494: warning: `err' might be used uninitialized in this function Signed-off-by: Badari Pulavarty

Re: select(0, ..) is valid ?

. Signed-off-by: Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- fs/compat.c | 17 +++-- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6.22-rc1/fs/compat.c === --- linux-2.6.22-rc1.orig/fs/compat.c 2007-05-12 18

select(0, ..) is valid ?

Hi, Is select(0, ..) is a valid operation ? I see that there is no check to prevent this or return success early, without doing any work. Do we need one ? slub code is complaining that we are doing kmalloc(0). Thanks, Badari [ cut here ] Badness at

Re: select(0, ..) is valid ?

On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 10:44 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Tue, 15 May 2007 10:29:18 -0700 Badari Pulavarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Is select(0, ..) is a valid operation ? Probably - it becomes an elaborate way of doing a sleep. Whatever - we used to permit it without error

Re: 2.6.18-mm3 oops in xfrm_register_mode

On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 16:02 -0500, Steve Fox wrote: On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 09:57 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: You might well find this bisection lands you on origin.patch. ie: a mainline bug. I note that David merged a few more xfrm fixes this morning. So to confirm that, first test

Re: 2.6.18-mm2 boot failure on x86-64

On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 09:53 -0500, Steve Fox wrote: On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 18:08 -0700, Martin Bligh wrote: Andi Kleen wrote: I think most likely it would crash on 2.6.18. Keith mannthey had reported a different crash on 2.6.18-rc4-mm2 when this patch was introduced first time. Following

Re: 2.6.18-mm2 boot failure on x86-64 II

keith mannthey wrote: On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 01:35 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: As of yet I haven't been able to recreate the hang. I am running similar HW to Steve. I ran into this with -mm3 Memory: 24150368k/26738688k available (1933k kernel code, 490260k reserved, 978k data, 308k

Re: Network problem with 2.6.18-mm1 ?

On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 17:30 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: So it looks like the kernel moved the ioapics. The following patch in 2.6.18-mm1 is known to have that effect. x86_64-mm-insert-ioapics-and-local-apic-into-resource-map Can you please try reverting that one patch? There

Re: [take3 2/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile() implementation.

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: AIO, aio_sendfile() implementation. This patch includes asynchronous propagation of file's data into VFS cache and aio_sendfile() implementation. Network aio_sendfile() works lazily - it asynchronously populates pages into the VFS cache (which can be used for various

Re: [3/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile() implementation.

Sébastien Dugué wrote: On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 09:22 -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote: Ulrich Drepper wrote: Christoph Hellwig wrote: My personal opinion on existing AIO is that it is not the right design. Benjamin LaHaise agree with me (if I understood him right

Re: [3/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile() implementation.

On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 11:14 -0700, Zach Brown wrote: Suparna mentioned at Ulrich wants us to concentrate on kernel-side support, so that he can look at glibc side of things (along with other work he is already doing). So, if we can get an agreement on what kind of kernel support is needed

Re: [3/4] kevent: AIO, aio_sendfile() implementation.

On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 11:44 -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: Badari Pulavarty wrote: Before we spend too much time cleaning up and merging into mainline - I would like an agreement that what we add is good enough for glibc POSIX AIO. I haven't seen a description of the interface so far