Stanislav Meduna wrote:
>> I'll try to get the host config from him and to reproduce
>> it in a clean environment with the similar config as he has
>> (2.6.23.17 + skas3, i tried with current and without skas).
>> Is the skas3 patch still maintained?
>
> An update: I can definitely reproduce the
Hello Pierre,
On 09/12, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
> You are right, the functionality can be implemented with the system call.
> But it means we have the overhead of a system call just to clear two bits,
> the TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE and the PTS_SELF.
Yes.
So you want to optimize the code for the (imho ver
Hi Dave,
be optimistic, why not?
I bet we will ;)
Pierre
Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 20:20 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
>> But... well, I think we need Roland's opinion. I must admit, I am a bit
>> sceptical about this patch ;) I mean, I don't really understand why it
>> is us
Hello Oleg,
You are right, the functionality can be implemented with the system call.
But it means we have the overhead of a system call just to clear two bits,
the TIF_SYSCALL_TRACE and the PTS_SELF.
On the other hand we have an overhead of one single "if" inside
the handle_signal() function.
W
Hi Dave,
Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 14:02 +0200, Pierre Morel wrote:
>
>> + if (is_self_ptracing(regs->gprs[2])) {
>> + if (!entryexit) {
>> + struct siginfo info;
>> +
>> + memset(&info, 0, sizeof(struct siginfo));
Hi,
I've been using uml on production servers for months, and have been
quite happy with it, except for I/O performance.
I was using the user-mode-linux package from Debian Etch, based on
2.6.18, and compiled with CONFIG_BLK_DEV_UBD_SYNC. Disabling this option
of course helps performance, but I f
