On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Rob Landley yowled:
> On Sunday 09 January 2005 08:53 pm, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Rob Landley wrote:
>> > I wonder if that old hack (deleting the file signalling there's no rush
>> > about writing stuff back to the disk anymore, although it's still your
>
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Rob Landley said:
> This doesn't work:
>
> ./linux rootfstype=hostfs rw init=/bin/ls -l > out.txt &
Well, it blocks.
It looks like UML is reading from stdin at some point (I haven't
looked to find out where; I suppose I should).
--
This is like system("/usr/funky/bin/perl
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] moaned:
> For most applications, the mention address-space is mapped to
> linux-gate.so, which to my understanding is a part of sysenter/tls
> implementation in glibc.
It is the vsyscall implementation; it's exported by the kernel,
not by glibc.
--
This is
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollably:
> Ok, I hope there is still somebody using UML on a NPTL-only system. The
> workaround suggested last time was to avoid enabling CONFIG_MODE_TT; now I
> think I've got over this problem, too. So, when I release 2.6.11.8-bs6 (which
>
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 16:31, Nix wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollably:
>> > Ok, I hope there is still somebody using UML on a NPTL-only system. The
>> > workaround suggested last
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Just give me the time to actually upload the tree, which I'm doing at the
> moment, and forgive me if I added anything ruining the compilation while I
> was working on x86_64 host.
Patch mis-rolled, I guess: arch/um/scripts/Makefile.rules is missing,
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollably:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 17:54, Nix wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> > On Tuesday 07 June 2005 16:31, Nix wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 07 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gibbered uncontrollabl
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] suggested tentatively:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 18:21, Nix wrote:
>> OK, so it's a -static TT build that's failing?
> Exactly.
Built, with a randomly selected .config (that is, a .config I use for
other things, not a .config with th
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 21:47, Nix wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] suggested tentatively:
>> > On Tuesday 07 June 2005 18:21, Nix wrote:
>> >> OK, so it's a -static TT build that's failing
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Jeff Dike prattled cheerily:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:09:06AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
>> > So I don't care about systemcall interception or anything like that,
>>
>> *blink* *blink*
>>
>> Ok, you want user mode linux, but you don't want it to actually run user
>> proce
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] moaned:
> On Monday 14 November 2005 14:59, Nix wrote:
>> I've long wanted to do the same sort of thing,
>
> I guess you would like to run userspace processes or at least to call libUML
> to configure something (but I don't thin
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Monday 21 November 2005 04:25, Nix wrote:
>> I hope linux-libc-headers isn't dead. It looked like it was turning into
>> a very good aggregation point, with patches coming in from Ubuntu and RH
>> among others.
>
> Ho
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Rob Landley uttered the following:
> There is a tmpfs mount, it's /dev/shm. And apparently, even if tmpfs isn't
> exposed as a separate filesystem, system V shared memory will still use it.
s/System V/POSIX/
It's the shm_open()/shm_close()shm_unlink() functions you're looki
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Chris Lightfoot murmured woefully:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 02:56:49PM +0000, Nix wrote:
>> You could certainly do just that with POSIX shm :)
>
> Another option is to mlock the memory, which should
> prevent paging, but requires root. I have a patch which
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley uttered the following:
> A) mlock would be a bad thing. Not only is it a trivial DOS waiting to
> happen
> but I like the UML physmem being swapped out under memory pressure. I just
> don't want uselessly writing it to disk over and over in the absence of any
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley moaned:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 13:33, Nix wrote:
>> Maybe this is a stupid question, but... why do *any* systems other than
>> extremely memory-constrained ones not mount tmpfs on /tmp? It seems to
>> me to have numerous advantages
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 22:04, Nix wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley moaned:
>> > On Friday 25 November 2005 13:33, Nix wrote:
>
>> > Actually, I consider the fact the OOM killer doesn&#x
[Sorry for response delay, steaming cold/flu]
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Rob Landley worried:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 15:04, Nix wrote:
>> The ~/.kde directory doesn't contain temporary files, but persistent state:
>
> ~/.kde/share/apps/kmail/lock is persistent state?
No, b
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Rob Landley murmured woefully:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 20:12, Nix wrote:
>> If it's a problem you have both hostile users and no size limits on /tmp
>> and you therefore have bigger problems anyway. :)
>
> The size limits on /tmp aren't p
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] whispered secretively:
> It's not a file, it's a AF_UNIX socket bound there - and bind() fails if the
> file exists. So it's a different story (I was puzzled by a missing
> bind(O_EXCL), but I learned with trial there's no need).
There's an (optional) abstr
t;> Some french disk archiving tool, apparently. I generally just use tarballs
>> or rsync.
>
> It's clear Nix is using some calculation program (not sure what's it).
I'm using both matlab/octave *and*, when running backups, said French disk
archiver. The source is gradual
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] whispered secretively:
> Plus, for deep troubleshooting (mainly for kernels) init=/bin/sh is useful.
init=/bin/busybox/sh is also useful for those cases when you've futzed
your libc. :)
>> > No - the kernel doesn't allow storing the full set of infos which a
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, Rob Landley prattled cheerily:
> If you're using udev, then /dev is tmpfs. So /dev/shm is trivially tmpfs.
True enough; but some people mount /dev with a size of 0. (Admittedly if
they don't want to break POSIX shm they'd better damn well mount *another*
tmpfs on /dev/shm wit
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] whispered secretively:
> On Sunday 11 December 2005 07:34, Rob Landley wrote:
>> On Friday 09 December 2005 12:39, Antoine Martin wrote:
>> > I wasn't even thinking about that! So true, why on earth would fsck
>> > require threading!?
It doesn't, at least not
The problem is that arch/um/os-Linux/sys-i386/registers.c
messes around inside a jmp_buf, and in glibc 2.4 the glibc
maintainers have helpfully removed the definitions that
let you poke around in there (they were only there for the
sake of one macro, _JMPBUF_UNWINDS, which is no longer
user-visible
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
> On Wednesday 21 June 2006 21:38, Nix wrote:
[jmp_buf goes hidden]
>> This vile patch lets me compile but is almost certainly not good enough:
>> however, I don't know what *is* good enough: now that glibc is
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] spake:
> On Sunday 25 June 2006 21:19, Nix wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] announced authoritatively:
>> > On Wednesday 21 June 2006 21:38, Nix wrote:
>>
>> [jmp_buf goes hidden]
>
>> > I made th
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ok, I missed one important bit of info. Plus, MARC archives when searching
> for
> author don't support restricting to one ML. So, here's the link to the
> discussion within UML-devel. Which is just a pointer to the issue (he surely
> doesn't expl
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stipulated:
> I'm starting to get sick of udev - on Ubuntu currently I'm unable to compile
> a
> vanilla kernel that works (I must still do more complete tests but I'm
> already beyond the "I've misconfigured something" moment).
All udev needs is CONFIG_HO
I recently upgraded my glibc to 2.5, and upgraded the userspace headers
at the same time. As a result, I've had several problems with UML.
One of these Jeff has seen reported and fixed, although the correct
cause was not described (the #inclusion of instead of
in user-offsets.c).
However, other
This diff applies against a kernel with the skas patch applied. It
splits ptrace.h into two pieces, one SKAS and one non-SKAS, and removes
a now-unused #define: I can reroll the skas patch accordingly if you
want, but the change is so trivial that it may not be worth it. It
needs to be on the guest
This diff removes references to the conflicting-with-kernel-headers
skas_ptrace.h, and moves skas_ptrace.h into the um header
tree. There are still some trees (PPC, IA64) with a copy of a
skas_ptrace.h left and without ptrace-skas.h broken off from
ptrace.h: these may be broken by this change, but
Another bug revealed by `make headers_install'ed header files.
Signed-off-by: Nick Alcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/stub.h |1 +
arch/um/include/sysdep-x86_64/stub.h |1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/um/include/sysdep-i386/s
On 29 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] verbalised:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 22:02, Nix wrote:
>> However, other problems are so-far undescribed. There's one trivial one
>> (fixed in patch 3 in this series, should be uncontroversial).
> Agreed.
Oh good, that's the
On 29 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 22:03, Nix wrote:
>> This diff removes references to the conflicting-with-kernel-headers
>> skas_ptrace.h, and moves skas_ptrace.h into the um header
>> tree.
> Unaccurate - you move sk
On 1 Dec 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On 29 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
>> arch/um/os-Linux/start_up.o is in USER_OBJS, so it is compiled against host
>> headers.
>> You cannot _depend_ on them including the SKAS patch, as I said. And that
>> header is
My firewall has long been a UML instance sitting atop a COW-backed UBD,
with the UBD being marked immutable and sha1-checked against a copy
on a CD-R every boot.
Now 2.6.22.1 (and probably 2.6.22 as well) gives me a panic on boot
which 2.6.21.* did not. Here's the complete boot log, ending with th
On 12 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated:
> My firewall has long been a UML instance sitting atop a COW-backed UBD,
> with the UBD being marked immutable and sha1-checked against a copy
> on a CD-R every boot.
... aaand Jeff solved it two days ago and I didn't notice. Er, oops?
Here, have a skas-
On 12 Jul 2007, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:55:46PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> ... aaand Jeff solved it two days ago and I didn't notice. Er, oops?
>
> Heh - it's good to have this in the list archives anyway. The only
> other place you
On 13 Jul 2007, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> COWed devices can't handle more than 32 (64 on x86_64) sectors in one
> request due to the size of the bitmap being carried around in the
> io_thread_req.
This feels like a -stable candidate to me.
---
On 13 Jul 2007, Jeff Dike outgrape:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 08:00:13PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> This feels like a -stable candidate to me.
>
> Right you are - that's the first place I sent it.
Ah. So, first I report a bug two days *after* you post a fix, and then I
recommend y
Without this commit, you can't compile UML on a system with 2.6.22
kernel headers (the reserved2 and reserved3 fields have been
renamed). With it, you can use 2.6.22 or older as you like.
(not forwarding to -stable because it seems importunate of me to do so:
is this being too cautious?)
--
`Som
On 20 Oct 2007, Paolo Giarrusso told this:
> Guess most people are not using SMP right now, and that the error disappears
> without that setting
It doesn't. It fails with non-SMP as well.
Rob, your patch works for me. (Not that the reboot into 2.6.23.1 was
problem-free: iproute2-071016 fails to
On 22 Oct 2007, WANG Cong uttered the following:
> I build UML for non-SMP x86. But I don't know about UML_NET_VDE. ;(
>
> Errors threw out by gcc (too many) are put here:
> http://wangcong.org/down/errors.txt
It's hard to tell without LOCALE=C, but those are the sorts of results
I'd expect
On 8 Dec 2007, Karol Swietlicki outgrape:
> I can't wait to test this.
WORKSFORME, nice and fast again just in time for weeks of unattended
operation as I head out for a nice long Newtonmass break. :)
(so it had better not crash! ;} )
--
`The rest is a tale of post and counter-post.' --- Ian Ra
On 15 Feb 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> The smoking gun - a poll that should have timed out in .5 sec slept
> for 12.
FWIW this breaks all sorts of things, as one might expect: obviously it
breaks select() as well as poll(). For me the symptoms were a failure of
DHCP and spontaneous dropping off th
On 17 Mar 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> Below is the same patch with another kluge, which cuts down the
> requested sleep by 10% in hopes of getting the actual sleep closer to
> what's wanted.
Eew. :)
> This is unusable in anything resembling mainline, but I'd like to see
> how your various
On 18 Mar 2008, Jeff Dike outgrape:
> Below is another patch.
>
> I was hurt and disappointed by your
>> Eew. :)
> so I got rid of the 9/10 thing.
Yay! That's much less dependent on the exact nature of whatever the
underlying bug is :) a random 9/10, well, it just makes my skin itch
even if i
On 18 Mar 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> This version keeps track of the time between ticks (as reported by the
> host's gettimeofday) and adjusts its sleeping and reporting ticks
> accordingly.
I can confirm that, as expected, this patch works well enough that
timing problems don't break dhclient a
The fixed timer patch you posted a few weeks back has indeed fixed my
select()-based timeout woes.
Unfortunately, both with the old kludgy approach and with the new
remain-versus-max estimator code, I see intermittent tight lockups of
the UML kernel-space ptrace thread, with that thread chewing al
On 14 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike spake thusly:
> Below is another patch for you to try. I spent most of last week
> chasing this one. The symptoms are somewhat similar to yours -
> intermittent UML hangs, although not with UML spinning, and it still
> pings.
Having not quite the same symptoms is intere
On 15 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> OK, trying that. (I'll extend the instrumentation patch to watch for
> zero cycle_interval as well, and see what happens. With luck nothing
> will happen except that the crashes will stop... except that they
> already *have* stopped for me. Annoying.)
Hard
On 16 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated:
> This *is* a change in behaviour: the backtrace is different! Yay! :)
I upgraded the guest to 2.6.25 a week ago and it stopped happening.
There is hope. (Mind you it's stopped going wrong for week-long periods
before...)
--
`If you are having a "ua lue
On 24 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> OK, yell if it starts happening again...
I tempted fate, and lo, it happens within the hour...
(gdb) bt
#0 0x08083e3a in getnstimeofday ()
I will now do what I should have done long since and turn on frame
pointers and debugging info so I can g
I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp that did it. (My ADSL
router pretty much bombs the poor damn machine with ARP packets all the
time.)
#0 getnstimeofday (ts=0x8217d10) at include/linux/time.h:182
#1 0x080824b4 in
On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
> I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
> CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp that did it. (My ADSL
> router pretty much bombs the poor damn machine with ARP packets all the
> time.)
Woo, it's happening a lot
On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
>
>> I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
>> CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp that did it. (My ADSL
>> router pretty much bombs the poor damn mach
On 26 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
> On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following:
>
>> On 25 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
>>
>>> I suspect this can go wrong anywhere, but it happens to have been a
>>> CBQ-triggered gettimeofday() while sending an arp tha
On 25 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike stated, in part:
> Index: linux-2.6-git/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6-git.orig/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c2008-04-25
> 10:42:12.0 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6-git/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c
On 28 Apr 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 07:31:44PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> The cause of this is almost certainly time-skewing on the *host* via
>> adjtimex(). I stopped ntpd and there were no problems for half a day: I
>> restarted it, and as soon as ntpd
On 1 May 2008, Jeff Dike outgrape:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:49:27PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> Done, and tested by stepping the time (five seconds --- five seconds per
>> day! I have pendulum clocks that keep better time than that!), and,
>> oops, instant loop as before, with
On 2 May 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> With your config, I'm seeing a hang until the system time catches up
> to what UML thought it should have been in the first place. But it's
> only a few seconds, not forever.
This is true sometimes, but not always: I just tried twice and got
a rapid recovery
On 2 May 2008, Jeff Dike stated:
> On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 07:55:11PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> I'm trying something else now, arranging for os_nsecs() itself to do the
>> never-backwards stuff on the assumption that something depends on
>> monotonic timers not skipping back
On 3 May 2008, Jeff Dike told this:
> On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:21:15AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> With this patch (migrating most of the work into os_nsecs(), with a
>> non-NO_HZ version doing skew computations too, atop your first patch,
>> and making a couple of variables static
On 6 May 2008, Andrew Morton uttered the following:
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 17:44:35 -0400
> Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 01:46:55PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > This fix was already present in your "[PATCH 4/19] UML - Random driver
>> > fixes".
>>
>> Ah, so
On 7 May 2008, Bram Matthys said:
> Or any help on how to get additional / useful info?
Set
CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y
CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER=y
in your kernel, and recompile. `bt' will then show heaps more info.
--
`If you are having a "ua luea luea le ua le" kind of day, I can only
assume that you ar
On 9 May 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] verbalised:
> The download is long, the untar too, but the freeze is garanteed!
If this doesn't work I can give you an account on, hm, the box which
freezes uses a UML for its network link so if you flip the time on it
you'd get cut off... and on the other machine
On 14 May 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> I finally reproduced this using 2.6.25.1 (2.6.25-mm1 was no good) with
> your config.
YAY! (I wonder why this was so .config-dependent? You'd think it would
trigger on anything, but I couldn't even make it happen on all my
hosts...)
> The patch below fixes
[vincent-perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> removed from Cc;,
his MTA says `Client host rejected: AP0002 Please use your ISP mailserver'
only I don't *have* an ISP mailserver.]
On 14 May 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] verbalised:
> Annoyingly, now I've upgraded the host to 2.6.25 (hence sans skas3),
> timings
On 14 May 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 09:12:12PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> Oh, and, it's pedantic of me, I know, but what does this do if time goes
>> backwards in the NO_HZ case? (Or is handling that a 2.6.26 thing?)
>
> In all cases, it holds
On 3 Jun 2008, Daniel Hazelton said:
> On Tuesday 03 June 2008 03:32:11 pm Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:02:35 -0400
>>
>> Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Protection against the host's time going backwards - keep track of the
>> > time at the last tick and if it's greater
On 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Dike verbalised:
> Aha, I was looking at timer_* and not getting reasonable-looking
> results. The one questionable aspect of this is that I need to pull
> in a new library (librt) and I wonder how many people don't have it
> installed...
It comes with glibc, and even ls uses
On 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> Index: linux-2.6.22/arch/um/os-Linux/time.c
Does this really only apply on top of 2.6.22? Which of the bewildering
blizzard of time-fixup patches we've been exchanging do I need? :)
--
`If you are having a "ua luea luea le ua le" kind of day, I
On 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Dike uttered the following:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 07:14:30PM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> It comes with glibc, and even ls uses it (for clock_gettime(), to
>> determine what format to use for date display).
>>
>> I'd say using it is about as sa
On 26 Mar 2009, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub spake thusly:
> Network doesn't seem to work for me in 2.6.29, although it was working
> in 2.6.28. System behavior seemed really strange, as it sometimes did
> work when I was using the same uml machine, when using a different
> user. Bisecting the kernel tre
75 matches
Mail list logo
