Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe Gerum wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe Gerum wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe, do you see any remaining issues, e.g. that the leak
survived
the task termination? Does this have any meaning for correct
driver and
skin code?
The only way I could see this le
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>>
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
>> Philippe, do you see any remaining issues, e.g. that the leak
>> survived
>> the task termination? Does this have any meaning for correct
>> driver and
>> skin code?
>>
>
>
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe Gerum wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe, do you see any remaining issues, e.g. that the leak survived
the task termination? Does this have any meaning for correct driver and
skin code?
The only way I could see this leakage survive a switch transition would
requir
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe Gerum wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe, do you see any remaining issues, e.g. that the leak survived
the task termination? Does this have any meaning for correct driver and
skin code?
The only way I could see this leakage survive a switch transition would
requir
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe, do you see any remaining issues, e.g. that the leak survived
the task termination? Does this have any meaning for correct driver and
skin code?
>>>
>>> The only way I could see this leakage survive a switch transition woul
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe, do you see any remaining issues, e.g. that the leak survived
the task termination? Does this have any meaning for correct driver and
skin code?
The only way I could see this leakage survive a switch transition would
require it to happen over the root context, not o
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
Hi Philippe,
debugging is nice, tracing is still nicer. As you suggested, I extended
the tracer with per-domain stall flags (needs some output clean-up,
preliminary patch attached ne
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Hi Philippe,
debugging is nice, tracing is still nicer. As you suggested, I extended
the tracer with per-domain stall flags (needs some output clean-up,
preliminary patch attached nevertheless).
And here is the result (full trace attache
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi Philippe,
>>
>> debugging is nice, tracing is still nicer. As you suggested, I extended
>> the tracer with per-domain stall flags (needs some output clean-up,
>> preliminary patch attached nevertheless).
>>
>> And here is the result (full trace attached):
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Hi Philippe,
debugging is nice, tracing is still nicer. As you suggested, I extended
the tracer with per-domain stall flags (needs some output clean-up,
preliminary patch attached nevertheless).
And here is the result (full trace attached):
:|(0x51)
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Hi Philippe,
>
> debugging is nice, tracing is still nicer. As you suggested, I extended
> the tracer with per-domain stall flags (needs some output clean-up,
> preliminary patch attached nevertheless).
>
> And here is the result (full trace attached):
>
>> :|(0x51) 0x000
Hi Philippe,
debugging is nice, tracing is still nicer. As you suggested, I extended
the tracer with per-domain stall flags (needs some output clean-up,
preliminary patch attached nevertheless).
And here is the result (full trace attached):
> :|(0x51) 0x00c8 -1113+ 1.112 __ipipe_sync_
12 matches
Mail list logo