I've got a kernel 2.4.10-pre13, (I tried with 2.4.7 patched, 2.4.9...), software
raid5, nfsd and I cant use quotas...
with the 2.4.7 patched, I could use 'usrquota' in fstab, but quotas were not
functionnal.
with 2.4.10-pre13, the 'usrquota' option is invalid, I can't mount anything
whith it and r
Hi,
I have been runing this along with the preemption patch on -pre12 without
problems. Reiserfsck(ing) a snapshot shows no corruptions. The fs in
question is fairly active - a 1G snapshot fills in about 12-18hours...
I am keeping a couple of good backups just in case...
Thanks,
Ed Tomlins
> If this analysis is correct:
> We really need to run RT processes with RT priorities!
>
> It is also possible that multimedia applications needs to be rewritten =
> to
I dont believe this is an application problem. Applications allocating
memory can end up doing page outs for other people. Its
On Friday 21 September 2001 01.15, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> > > > > Right, the patch is returning the length preemption was unavailable
> > > > > (which is when a lock is held) in us. So it is indded 4ms.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, I think Dieter is saying
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 19:15, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> All I'm saying is that you should check for >= 0, not == 0.
And I am saying we already keep track of that, we have a preemption
counter.
> But anwyays it's pretty depressing to see such a costly check needed to
> get latency right with the p
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> > > > Right, the patch is returning the length preemption was unavailable
> > > > (which is when a lock is held) in us. So it is indded 4ms.
> > > >
> > > > But, I think Dieter is saying he _sees_ 0.5~1s latencies (in the form
> > > > of audio skips).
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 18:37, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 06:24:48PM -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> >
> > if (current->need_resched && current->lock_depth == 0) {
> > unlock_kernel();
> > lock_kernel();
> > }
> nitpicking: the above is fine but it isn't complete, it may
Am Freitag, 21. September 2001 00:03 schrieb Oliver Xymoron:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 20. September 2001 23:10 schrieb Robert Love:
> > > On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 04:21, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > > > You've forgotten a one liner.
> > > > >
> > > > > #includ
Am Donnerstag, 20. September 2001 22:52 schrieb Robert Love:
> On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 13:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Andrew, are these still maintained or should I pull out the reiserfs
> > > bits?
> >
> > This is the reiserfs part - it applies to 2.4.10-pre12 OK.
> >
> > For the purposes of Rob
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 04:21, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > You've forgotten a one liner.
> >
> > #include
> > +#include
>
> woops, didn't trapped it because of gcc 3.0.2. thanks.
>
> > But this is not enough. Even with reniced artsd (-20).
> > Some shorter hiccups (0.5~1 sec).
>
> I'm not fa
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 03:57, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> You've forgotten a one liner.
>
> #include
> +#include
>
> But this is not enough. Even with reniced artsd (-20).
> Some shorter hiccups (0.5~1 sec).
Note (I am repeated myself from an email I just sent) that the
conditional schedule won'
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 13:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Andrew, are these still maintained or should I pull out the reiserfs bits?
>
> This is the reiserfs part - it applies to 2.4.10-pre12 OK.
>
> For the purposes of Robert's patch, conditional_schedule()
> should be defined as
>
> if (cu
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 13:08, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> I examined that ReiserFS suffer from kupdated since 2.4.7-ac3.
> When ever I do "kill -STOP kupdated" the performance is much better.
> I know this is unsafe...
The patches that are going around in this thread (stuff from Andrew
Morton and Andre
george anzinger wrote:
>
> Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> >
> > those are kernel addresses, can you resolve them via System.map rather
> > than trying to find their start/end line number?
>
> Uh, trying to find??? These are the names and line numbers provided by
> the PPC macros. The only time the
On Thu, 2001-09-20 at 02:31, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> Here are some results for 2.4.10-pre12 (Andrea's VM :-)
>
> Athlon II 1 GHz (0.18 µm)
> MSI MS-6167 Rev 1.0B (Irongate C4)
> 640 MB PC100-2-2-2 SDRAM
> IBM DDYS 18 GB U160 (on AHA-2940UW)
> ReiserFS 3.6 on all partitions
>
> Sound driver is the
On Thursday, September 20, 2001 07:08:25 PM +0200 Dieter Nützel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please have a look at Robert Love's Linux kernel preemption patches and
> the conversation about my reported latency results.
>
Andrew Morton has patches that significantly improve the reiserfs late
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Beau Kuiper wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Chris Mason wrote:
> > >
> > On Thursday, September 20, 2001 03:12:44 PM +0800 Beau Kuiper
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Resierfs on 2.4 has always been bog slow.
> > >
> > > I have identified kupdated as the
17 matches
Mail list logo
