On 02/02/2016 22:11, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
> On 2016-02-01 1:07, Roy Marples wrote:
>> On 30/01/2016 19:39, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
>>> In general, I personally don't think it ever makes sense to shutdown
>>> by default when the temperature is exceeded, since most of these
>>>
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 11:46:45AM +, Roy Marples wrote:
> How would you handle a non process intensive master spawning process
> itensive workers to replace the ones you just killed?
If an admin wants to go that way, I would try to catch soft limits in
the powerd script and then tune rlimits
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 01:44:58PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>
> It's probably simple but time-consuming because there are more than
> one and a half hundreds drivers. I just want to avoid spending time
> for this task and go back to the main task (L3 MP-ification)...
If you can get spatch to
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Nick Hudson wrote:
> On 02/03/16 04:44, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Taylor R Campbell
>> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>>>
>>> In this case, it's not a priori clear to me why the caller must
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Taylor R Campbell
wrote:
>Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 14:55:31 +0900
>From: Ryota Ozaki
>
>Here is a new patch:
> http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/softint-if_input-percpuq2.diff
>The diff from
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Edgar Fuss wrote:
I tried updating a 4.0.1 machine (amd64) to 6.1 by first updating the kernel
and I get a ``libpthread: sa_register failed: Invalid argument'' (when trying
to start nslcd). Any hints?
Is this down to the kern.no_sa_support sysctl?
--
Stephen
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:53:45AM +, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:35:46 +0900
>From: Ryota Ozaki
>
>On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 01:44:58PM +0900, Ryota
On 2016-02-03 10:06, Eduardo Horvath wrote:
On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
Wouldn't the correct solution then be to kill the process-intensive jobs,
instead of shutting down the whole system?
That doesn't really make too much sense.
In theory, if the CPU has a low power
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 01:44:58PM +0900, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
>>
>> It's probably simple but time-consuming because there are more than
>> one and a half hundreds drivers. I just want to avoid spending time
>> for this
On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:
> Wouldn't the correct solution then be to kill the process-intensive jobs,
> instead of shutting down the whole system?
That doesn't really make too much sense.
In theory, if the CPU has a low power mode and the machine detects
thermal issues,
I tried updating a 4.0.1 machine (amd64) to 6.1 by first updating the kernel
and I get a ``libpthread: sa_register failed: Invalid argument'' (when trying
to start nslcd). Any hints?
> Is this down to the kern.no_sa_support sysctl?
Hm, probably yes. What's the point of that variable (I couldn't find
anything useful in the archives)? At a first glance, it looks like
kern.partly_break_4_compatibility_on_purpose.
> Scheduler activation has been fully removed.
In 6.1? I should be getting ENOSYS, not EINVAL then, no?
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 04:42:32PM +0100, Edgar Fuss wrote:
> I tried updating a 4.0.1 machine (amd64) to 6.1 by first updating the kernel
> and I get a ``libpthread: sa_register failed: Invalid argument'' (when trying
> to start nslcd). Any hints?
Scheduler activation has been fully removed.
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 14:55:31 +0900
From: Ryota Ozaki
Here is a new patch:
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/softint-if_input-percpuq2.diff
The diff from v1 is here:
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/softint-if_input-percpuq2-diff.diff
Some comments:
-
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 06:43:58PM +0100, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > Is this down to the kern.no_sa_support sysctl?
> Hm, probably yes. What's the point of that variable (I couldn't find
> anything useful in the archives)? At a first glance, it looks like
>
16 matches
Mail list logo