Am 16.11.2015 um 12:49 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
> On 11/16/2015 12:44 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Am 16.11.2015 um 10:43 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
>>> Starting UML like this:
>>>
>>> ./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel con=xterm
>>> init=/bin/bash
>>>
>>> Results in
On 11/16/2015 06:32 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 16.11.2015 um 12:49 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
>> On 11/16/2015 12:44 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> Am 16.11.2015 um 10:43 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
Starting UML like this:
./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel
Hi!
Am 16.11.2015 um 10:43 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
> Hi,
>
> Starting UML like this:
>
> ./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel con=xterm
> init=/bin/bash
>
> Results in unpredictable behaviour, most of the time an xterm flashes on
> my screen but the process aborts with only
On 11/16/2015 12:44 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 16.11.2015 um 10:43 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
>> Starting UML like this:
>>
>> ./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel con=xterm
>> init=/bin/bash
>>
>> Results in unpredictable behaviour, most of the time an xterm flashes on
>>
Am 16.11.2015 um 12:49 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
> On 11/16/2015 12:44 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Am 16.11.2015 um 10:43 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
>>> Starting UML like this:
>>>
>>> ./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel con=xterm
>>> init=/bin/bash
>>>
>>> Results in
On 16/11/15 11:53, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 16.11.2015 um 12:49 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
>> On 11/16/2015 12:44 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> Am 16.11.2015 um 10:43 schrieb Vegard Nossum:
Starting UML like this:
./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel
Hi,
Starting UML like this:
./vmlinux rootfstype=hostfs rw ignore_console_loglevel con=xterm
init=/bin/bash
Results in unpredictable behaviour, most of the time an xterm flashes on
my screen but the process aborts with only "Aborted" on the console
where I ran the command, sometimes the xterm
On 12/11/15 16:03, Anton Ivanov wrote:
> On 12/11/15 15:23, Anton Ivanov wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
Hmmm, UML is UP and does not support PREEMPT, so all spinlocks
should be a no-op.
>>> In that case, if I understand correctly what is going on, there are a
>>> couple of places - the free_irqs(),
