* Re: RT and XFS
From: Esben Nielsen @ 2005-07-18 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Walker
Cc: Ingo Molnar, Dave Chinner, Nathan Scott, Steve Lord, linux-kernel,
linux-xfs, Christoph Hellwig
In-Reply-To: <1121444215.19554.18.camel@c-67-188-6-232.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 12:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> wrote:
> >
> > > PI is always good, cause it allows the tracking of what is high
> > > priority , and what is not .
> >
> > that's just plain wrong. PI might be good if one cares about priorities
> > and worst-case latencies, but most of the time the kernel is plain good
> > enough and we dont care. PI can also be pretty expensive. So in no way,
> > shape or form can PI be "always good".
>
> I don't agree with that. But of course I'm always speaking from a real
> time perspective . PI is expensive , but it won't always be. However, no
> one is forcing PI on anyone, even if I think it's good ..
>
Is PI needed? If you use a mutex to protect a critical area you are
destroying the strict meaning of priorities if the mutex doesn't have PI:
Priority inversion can effectively make the high priority task low
priority in that situation and postpone it's execution indefinitely.
For RT applications that is clearly unacceptable.
One can argue that for non-RT tasks priorities aren't supposed to be that
rigid as for RT tasks, anyway. Therefore it doesn't matter so much.
But as I read the comments in sched.c a nice -20 task have to preempt any
nice 0 task no matter how much a cpu-hog it is. If it happens to share a
critical section with a nice +19 task, priority inversion will
occationally destroy that property. If we disregard the costs of PI, PI is
thus a good thing.
But how expensive is PI? Ofcourse there is an overhead in doing
the calculations. Ingo's implementation can be optimized quite a bit once
things are settled but it will always be many times more expensive than a
raw spin-lock. But is it much more expensive than a plain binary
semaphore?
If the is no congestion on a mutex the PI code will not be called at all.
On UP, the only occation where congestion can occur is when a low
priority task is preempted by a higher priority task while it has the
mutex. So let us look at the expensive part where the high priority task
tries to grab the mutex:
With PI: The owner have to be boosted, an immediate task switch have to
take place, the owner runs to the unlock operation and it set down in
priority, whereafter there is a task-switch again to the highpriority
task.
Without PI: The owner waits and there is a task switch to some thread
which might not be the owner but often is. When the owner eventually
unlocks the mutex it will be follow by a task-switch - because congestion
can only occur when the task trying to get the task preempts and thus have
higher priority than the owner.
The number of task switches are thus the same with and without PI!
And then there is the cache issue: When other tasks gets scheduled in the
priority inversion case the data being protected can be flushed from the
cache while they are running. With PI the CPU continues to work with the
same data - and most often in the same code module. I.e. there is a higher
chance that the instruction and data cache contains the right data.
Thus in the end it all depends on how cheaply the PI calculations can be
made.
Esben
> Daniel
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [Bluez-devel] Help with bluez pairing problem!!
From: Marcel Holtmann @ 2005-07-18 11:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bluez-devel
In-Reply-To: <IJTM7X$1B27DB0B4797131F8B5DE564475869A0@libero.it>
Hi Andrea,
> i have a problem with pairing in a scenario where a pc tries to push (via obex) a file to a cell phone. I set up all my environment and all works fine, on my cell the PC PIN is requested and after i enter it the file is trasmitted and all goes fine. But i ve this kind of problem:
>
> After the first authentication i still need (for my project requirementes) that next pushes to the cell ask again for PIN. To do this i think i suppose i need to delete (on my cell phone side or on my pc side) the authentication info. I need to do it on my pc, but how can i programmatically delete a pairing entry from the link_key file ?
the newer bluez-utils version don't use /etc/bluetooth/link_key file
anymore. See my posting for details.
Regards
Marcel
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] signed char fixes for scripts
From: Paulo Marques @ 2005-07-18 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paulo Marques; +Cc: Sam Ravnborg, J.A. Magallon, Andrew Morton, linux-kernel
In-Reply-To: <42DB8F7B.30100@grupopie.com>
Paulo Marques wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> [...]
>> Also this patch seems relative small compared to the others floating
>> around to cure signed warnings in scripts/
>> Does this really fix all of them or only a subset of the warnings?
>
> Well, current -linus already has a patch from me to change the
^^^^^^
I meant -mm... :P
--
Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems
just with potatoes.
Douglas Adams
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: 2.6.12 hangs on boot
From: Alexander Y. Fomichev @ 2005-07-18 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Kernel Mailing List, admin, Git Mailing List, ak
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0506241446440.11175@ppc970.osdl.org>
On Saturday 25 June 2005 02:20, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, Alexander Y. Fomichev wrote:
> > I've been trying to switch from 2.6.12-rc3 to 2.6.12 on Dual EM64T 2.8
> > GHz [ MoBo: Intel E7520, intel 82801 ]
> > but kernel hangs on boot right after records:
> >
> > Booting processor 2/1 rip 6000 rsp ffff8100023dbf58
> > Initializing CPU#2
>
> Hmm.. Since you seem to be a git user, maybe you could try the git
> "bisect" thing to help narrow down exactly where this happened (and help
> test that thing too ;).
[skiped]
Ok, as i can see [and as Andi guessed
http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4792]
issue have been introduced by new TSC sync algorithm
git id: dda50e716dc9451f40eebfb2902c260e4f62cf34.
And, yes, seems like it depends of timings...
In my case kludge with insertion of low delay (e.g. printk) between
cpu_set/mb and tsc_sync_wait() makes kernel bootable.
diff -urN b/arch/x86_64/kernel/smpboot.c a/arch/x86_64/kernel/smpboot.c
--- b/arch/x86_64/kernel/smpboot.c 2005-07-17 21:55:55.000000000 +0400
+++ a/arch/x86_64/kernel/smpboot.c 2005-07-17 21:57:56.000000000 +0400
@@ -451,6 +451,7 @@
cpu_set(smp_processor_id(), cpu_online_map);
mb();
+ printk(KERN_INFO "We're still here!\n");
/* Wait for TSC sync to not schedule things before.
We still process interrupts, which could see an inconsistent
time in that window unfortunately. */
--
Best regards.
Alexander Y. Fomichev <gluk@php4.ru>
Public PGP key: http://sysadminday.org.ru/gluk.asc
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Increasing virtual address space of a process, by treating virtual address's as offsets in secondary memory.
From: Alan Cox @ 2005-07-18 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: vamsi krishna; +Cc: linux-kernel
In-Reply-To: <3faf056805071721422594dd20@mail.gmail.com>
On Llu, 2005-07-18 at 10:12 +0530, vamsi krishna wrote:
> I was searching a lot about work on this, and found your reply where
> you say that we can increase the virtual address space by mmaping and
> munmaping programatically ourself.
Its something a few giant applications do with data sets and the trick
of using shared memory segments works on most Linux or Unixlike systems.
It's almost a historical note now. With 64bit processors its no longer
worth the pain
^ permalink raw reply
* [Bluez-devel] Help with bluez pairing problem!!
From: andi.c @ 2005-07-18 11:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bluez-devel
Hi to all,
i have a problem with pairing in a scenario where a pc trie=
s to push (via obex) a file to a cell phone. I set up all my environment =
and all works fine, on my cell the PC PIN is requested and after i enter =
it the file is trasmitted and all goes fine. But i ve this kind of proble=
m:
After the first authentication i still need (for my project require=
mentes) that next pushes to the cell ask again for PIN. To do this i thin=
k i suppose i need to delete (on my cell phone side or on my pc side) the=
authentication info. I need to do it on my pc, but how can i programmati=
cally delete a pairing entry from the link_key file ?
thansk for every=
kind of help !
Andrea
=0A=0A=0A=0A______________________________=
______________________________=0ALibero Flat, sempre a 4 Mega a 19,95 eur=
o al mese! =0AAbbonati subito su http://www.libero.it=0A=0A
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt
From: Maciej W. Rozycki @ 2005-07-18 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Venkatesh Pallipadi
Cc: Andi Kleen, Brown, Len, akpm, linux-kernel, torvalds, vojtech,
christoph
In-Reply-To: <20050715110157.A16008@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Venkatesh Pallipadi wrote:
> Well.. I tried a patch to do the broadcast thing couple of months ago and
> failed to convince everyone :(.
I must have missed the patch -- but was the change unconditional or
affecting only broken systems? And how such systems were determined?
> Further, it doesn't work well if you want to exclude some CPUs from the
> list of recievers. Logical destination is simple only for less than 8
> CPUs. Beyond that with clustered or physical configuration it is
> difficult.
Well, I've thought the number of bits for LDR has been reexpanded at one
point (it had been 32 originally with the 82489DX and then shrank to 8
with the Pentium integrated APIC) -- it must have been something else...
Anyway, for this you should just need a single bit as, quoting APIC
documentation:
"When the message addresses the destination using logical addressing
scheme each Local Unit in the ICC bus compares the logical address in the
interrupt message with its own Logical Destination Register. If there is
a bit match (i.e., if at least one of the corresponding pair of bits
match) this local unit is selected for delivery."
Thus you could make, say, bit 31 of LDR the "timer bit", set it in all
local APIC units and send timer interrupts in the Fixed delivery mode
using a logical destination address with only bit 31 set. You could then
exclude processors from delivery by clearing bit 31 of LDR as needed. It
could probably be applied to addresses within clusters, too, though space
there is a bit tight.
None of such hassle should be needed in reality, though -- I presume the
only broken systems are uniprocessor ones with the HT feature as real SMP
systems need to have their APICs enabled all the time to be able to accept
IPIs if nothing else. As UP systems with HT have only two processors
logically, there is no problem with using the logical destination mode as
currently implemented.
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: boot failure help needed
From: Nuguru Susheel @ 2005-07-18 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wolfgang Denk; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
In-Reply-To: <20050718105318.CADBE352586@atlas.denx.de>
> >
> > Sorry to ask but what is BAPI ??? (I hope people wont mind answering
> > for newbie questions)
>
> BAPI = BestComm Application Programming Interface, i. e. the code in
> arch/ppc/5xxx_io/bestcomm/
Thanks for guiding me Denk, where can i get it from? ... and how is it
effecting here in this situation ?? sorry for too many questions, but it
will help me to learn and solve the problem ..
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] signed char fixes for scripts
From: Paulo Marques @ 2005-07-18 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: J.A. Magallon, Andrew Morton, linux-kernel
In-Reply-To: <20050716095216.GB8064@mars.ravnborg.org>
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 10:14:43PM +0000, J.A. Magallon wrote:
>
>>On 07.16, J.A. Magallon wrote:
>>[...]
>>This time I did not break anything... and they shut up gcc4 ;)
>
> Thanks.
> Can you please resend with proper changelog and signed-off-by.
> Diff should be done on top of latest -linus preferable.
> Also this patch seems relative small compared to the others floating
> around to cure signed warnings in scripts/
> Does this really fix all of them or only a subset of the warnings?
Well, current -linus already has a patch from me to change the
compression scheme that also fixes most of the signedness problems. The
ones below escaped me because my gcc3.3.2 didn't complain about them
even with all the -W[xxx] switches I could find.
This takes a big hunk out of previous patches I've seen, so that might
explain the difference.
--
Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems
just with potatoes.
Douglas Adams
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Kernel Panic: VFS cannot open a root device
From: Ed Tomlinson @ 2005-07-18 11:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fawad Lateef; +Cc: porranenhuma@globo.com, Norbert van Nobelen, linux-kernel
In-Reply-To: <1e62d13705071719462d437a21@mail.gmail.com>
On Sunday 17 July 2005 22:46, Fawad Lateef wrote:
> I saw this prob when my boot device/partition in the bootloader config
> was wrong or the filesystem of my root partition is not compiled as a
> kernel image rather compiled as module, so plz try to solve this prob
> by selecting your desired filesystem in kernel configuration as Y
> rather than M ...... I hope this will work
One further tip. Make your root FS's type the only one that is not a module.
Once you have it booting then, if you want, flip other FSes to in kernel.
Ed Tomlinson
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Testimonials page
From: PFC @ 2005-07-18 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list
In-Reply-To: <200507181121.37489.chrivers@iversen-net.dk>
If I did say I backed up 0x6ddd0 files in 8 minutes would he be happy ?
Most off topic thread of the year award.
> But it's probably safe to say that outside of physics (and even there it
> would
> be odd), 123.456 is "1 dot 23456 * 10^5"
>
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: DNATing Windows File Sharing
From: Jan Engelhardt @ 2005-07-18 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Vangel; +Cc: netfilter
In-Reply-To: <42DB7B5D.1090506@rfgt.net>
>All of the ports for windows file sharing you want to call it are..
>
>135/tcp, 137/udp, 138/tcp, 139/udp, 139/tcp, 445/tcp
>
>Some of them are for RPC things so you might not actually want them
>open, but I don't know which specific one(s) they are.
epmap 135/tcp # DCE endpoint resolution
epmap 135/udp # DCE endpoint resolution
netbios-ns 137/tcp # NETBIOS Name Service
netbios-ns 137/udp # NETBIOS Name Service
netbios-dgm 138/tcp # NETBIOS Datagram Service
netbios-dgm 138/udp # NETBIOS Datagram Service
netbios-ssn 139/tcp # NETBIOS Session Service
netbios-ssn 139/udp # NETBIOS Session Service
microsoft-ds 445/tcp # Microsoft-DS
microsoft-ds 445/udp # Microsoft-DS
I have never seen epmap on my network, so 135 does not belong to it. 138
traffic is also rare.
Jan Engelhardt
--
^ permalink raw reply
* shared subtrees implementation writeup
From: Miklos Szeredi @ 2005-07-18 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxram; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-fsdevel, viro, akpm, mike, bfields
In-Reply-To: <1121304437.5288.32.camel@localhost>
Thanks for the writeup, it helps to understand things a bit better.
However I still don't understand a few things:
> Section 1. mount:
>
> to begin with we have a the following mount tree
>
> root
> / / \ \ \
> / t1 t2 \ \
> t0 t3 \
> t4
>
> note:
> t0, t1, t2, t3, t4 all contain mounts.
> t1 t2 t3 are the slave of t0.
> t4 is the slave of t2.
> t4 and t3 is marked as shared.
>
> The corresponding propagation tree will be:
>
> p0
> / \
> p1 p2
> /
> p3
>
>
> ***************************************************************
> p0 contains the mount t0, and contains the slave mount t1
> p1 contains the mount t2
> p3 contains the mount t4
> p2 contains the mount t3
>
> NOTE: you may need to look at this multiple time as you try to
> understand the various scenarios.
> ***************************************************************
Why you have p2 and p3? They contain a single mount only, which could
directly be slaves to p0 and p1 respectively. Does it have something
to do with being shared?
BTW, is there a reason not to include the pnode info in 'struct
vfsmount'? That would simplify a lot of allocation error cases.
> The key point to be noted in the above set of operations is:
> each pnode does three different operations corresponding to each stage.
>
> A. when the pnode is encountered the first time, it has to create
> a new pnode for its child mounts.
> B. when the pnode is encountered again after it has traversed down
> each slave pnode, it has to associate the slave pnode's newly created
> pnode with the pnode's newly created pnode.
> C. when the pnode is encountered finally after having traversed through
> all its slave pnodes, it has to create new child mounts
> for each of its member mounts.
Now why is this needed? Couldn't each of these be done in a single step?
I still can't see the reason for having these things done at different
stages of the traversal.
Thanks,
Miklos
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] CPUFreq Support for PXA255
From: Ian Campbell @ 2005-07-18 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dominik Brodowski; +Cc: cpufreq
In-Reply-To: <20050715164115.GA3240@isilmar.linta.de>
On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 18:41 +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
Thanks for you comments.
I've snipped the bits for changes that I've already done.
> > +static void pxa_select_freq_table(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
> > + pxa_freqs_t ** settings,
> > + struct cpufreq_frequency_table
> **table)
> > +{
> [SNIP]
> > +}
>
> As noted by Eric Piel already, please use a module parameter combined
> with a sysfs file instead.
>
I've got it working with a module parameter so cpu_pxa.performance=1
allows selection of the performance table at boot time.
This also creates /sys/module/cpu_pxa/parameters/performance which can
be written to and takes effect on the next frequency change. Is this
acceptable or should I look for a way to add a sysfs file
to /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq? The advantage would be
immediate application of the change (I think...)
> > + cpumask_t cpus_allowed;
>
> Is this a SMP-capable platform?
I don't really know to be honest -- there are SMP ARM's in the world but
I don't know if that will ever extend to the PXA. I doubt it, but I've
asked on the ARM kernel list.
> Is the PXA just a sub-architecture of ARM?
That's right, it's one of Intel's ARM implementations, it takes over
from their StrongARM stuff. The PXA line is quite commonly found in
PDAs.
> > choice
> > prompt "Default CPUFreq governor"
> > - default CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE if CPU_FREQ_SA1100 || CPU_FREQ_SA1110
> > + default CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE if CPU_FREQ_SA1100 || CPU_FREQ_SA1110 || CPU_FREQ_PXA
>
> Why is that?
I've no idea -- I just copied the StrongARM stuff. My guess is that
someone decided that PERFORMANCE wasn't suitable as the default for an
"embedded" platform. I think I'll probably just drop this chunk since
you can always choose via config anyway. I've pinged the ARM list just
in case there is a more pressing reason.
Ian.
--
Ian Campbell, Senior Design Engineer
Web: http://www.arcom.com
Arcom, Clifton Road, Direct: +44 (0)1223 403 465
Cambridge CB1 7EA, United Kingdom Phone: +44 (0)1223 411 200
_____________________________________________________________________
The message in this transmission is sent in confidence for the attention of the addressee only and should not be disclosed to any other party. Unauthorised recipients are requested to preserve this confidentiality. Please advise the sender if the addressee is not resident at the receiving end. Email to and from Arcom is automatically monitored for operational and lawful business reasons.
This message has been virus scanned by MessageLabs.
^ permalink raw reply
* lowest limit for balloon?
From: aq @ 2005-07-18 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
hello,
currently there is one problem with balloon: if we specify too little
memory for a domain, that domain might crash with OOM error. even in
that case, balloon still happily do what we request. i just
accidentally balloon dom0 to 0M, and must reboot the machine ;-)
so i guess it is better to enforce a certain limit, so balloon will
not bring the amount of memory for a domain to be lower than that
level.
there are few choices to do this:
- each domain has a configurable option for this (for example:
balloon-level in domain config file)
- xen automatically determine this level for each domain (but how?)
any idea?
regards,
aq
^ permalink raw reply
* Newbe problem with rpc filtering
From: Christian Andretzky @ 2005-07-18 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
Hi,
I'm more or less new with packet filtering an have a problem to get my
iptables running with the extensions for rpc filtering under SuSE 9.3
As far as I could see they have installed iptables 1.3.1 and the patch-o-matic
extensions for rpc too (the newer one, which supports the syntax
'-m rpc --rpcs [list, of, services]')
But unfortunately I cannot get it running.
If I use '-m rpc --rpcs list, of, services' then I get the response
'Bad argument xxx' for the second parameter in the list of services
If I use '-m rpc --rpcs xxx' (wich only one parameter) or "-m rpc' with no
'--rpcs' parameter (fallback to old record_rpc style) I get the message
'iptables: No chain/target/match by that name'
Is there anybody who can help me to fix that problem
TIA, Christian
P.S. Please answer to my personal address because I'm not subscribed to the list.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: boot failure help needed
From: Wolfgang Denk @ 2005-07-18 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nuguru Susheel; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
In-Reply-To: <1121687419.3288.27.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In message <1121687419.3288.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> you wrote:
>
> Sorry to ask but what is BAPI ??? (I hope people wont mind answering
> for newbie questions)
BAPI = BestComm Application Programming Interface, i. e. the code in
arch/ppc/5xxx_io/bestcomm/
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
There are three ways to get something done:
(1) Do it yourself.
(2) Hire someone to do it for you.
(3) Forbid your kids to do it.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt
From: Maciej W. Rozycki @ 2005-07-18 10:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andi Kleen
Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi, Brown, Len, akpm, linux-kernel, torvalds,
vojtech, christoph
In-Reply-To: <20050715175819.GF15783@wotan.suse.de>
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > That's like scratching your left ear with your right hand -- broadcasting
> > that external timer interrupt in the first place is more straightforward.
> > If you want to exclude CPUs from the list of receivers, just use the
> > logical destination mode appropriately.
>
> The problem with that is that it would need regular synchronizations
> of all CPUs to coordinate this. Not good for scalability and I
> believe the fundamentally wrong way to do this.
What to you mean by "regular synchronizations of all CPUs?" And how is a
broadcasted external timer interrupt different from a unicasted one
redistributed further via an all-but-self IPI, except from removing an
unnecessary burden from the CPU targeted by the unicast interrupt?
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] scrub_pages in balloon
From: Keir Fraser @ 2005-07-18 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aq; +Cc: xen-devel
In-Reply-To: <9cde8bff05071801458980b8a@mail.gmail.com>
On 18 Jul 2005, at 09:45, aq wrote:
> This patch makes balloon driver only scrubs page when
> CONFIG_XEN_SCRUB_PAGES enabled.
Not required. The macro already is conditional.
-- Keir
^ permalink raw reply
* [U-Boot-Users] Boot Delay 0 !!!
From: Bharathi Subramanian @ 2005-07-18 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
Hello All,
Recently one of our unit's flash is got corrupted. Bcoz of that, one
module is not started. So watch dog is rebooting the unit with-in 2
Sec after booting up.
We thought of booting that unit in NFS and mount the JFFS Data
partition for recovering the data file, address book, from that flash.
Fortunately the boot delay is Zero. So we coun't do anything.
Is there any trick to get the prompt ??
Bye :)
--
Bharathi S
^ permalink raw reply
* [U-Boot-Users] Boot Delay 0 !!!
From: Dominique bastien @ 2005-07-18 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0507181556040.31767-100000@bharathi.midascomm.com>
You can try this (this is from The DENX U−Boot
and Linux Guide (DULG) for TQM8xxL):
This feature is available in U−Boot if you
enable the CONFIG_BOOTCOUNT_LIMIT configuration
option.
The implementation uses the following environment
variables:
bootcount:
This variable will be automatically created if it does
not exist, and it will be updated at each reset of
the processor. After a power−on reset, it will
be initialized with 1, and each reboot will increment
the
value by 1.
bootlimit:
If this variable exists, its contents are taken as the
maximum number of reboot cycles allowed.
altbootcmd:
If, after a reboot, the new value of bootcount exceeds
the value of bootlimit, then instead of
the standard boot action (executing the contents of
bootcmd) an alternate boot action will be
performed, and the contents of altbootcmd will be
executed.
If the variable bootlimit is not defined in the
environment, the Boot Count Limit feature is disabled.
If it is
enabled, but altbootcmd is not defined, then
U−Boot will drop into interactive mode and
remain there.
It is the responsibility of some application code
(typically a Linux application) to reset the variable
bootcount, thus allowing for more boot cycles.
At the moment, the Boot Count Limit feature is
available only for MPC8xx and MPC82xx PowerPC
processors.
--- Bharathi Subramanian <sbharathi@MidasComm.Com>
wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Recently one of our unit's flash is got corrupted.
> Bcoz of that, one
> module is not started. So watch dog is rebooting the
> unit with-in 2
> Sec after booting up.
>
> We thought of booting that unit in NFS and mount the
> JFFS Data
> partition for recovering the data file, address
> book, from that flash.
> Fortunately the boot delay is Zero. So we coun't do
> anything.
>
> Is there any trick to get the prompt ??
>
> Bye :)
> --
> Bharathi S
>
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux
> Migration Strategies
> from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps,
> straightforward articles,
> informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you
> need to get up to
> speed, fast.
>
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot-Users mailing list
> U-Boot-Users at lists.sourceforge.net
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Barebone Porcelain. Where to stop?
From: Catalin Marinas @ 2005-07-18 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bryan Larsen; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, git
In-Reply-To: <42DB32F1.5020900@gmail.com>
Bryan Larsen <bryan.larsen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any lack of porcelain momentum is probably due to git having better
> documentation than the current porcelains, such as cogito and stacked
> git. The documentation, like tutorial.txt and Jeff Garzik's git
> kernel howto give the impression that most kernel folks use git
> instead of cogito.
>
> I personally think that the cogito interface and stacked git
> interfaces are much nicer than git's, and would like to see these two
> tools achieve some momentum.
I don't see git going towards stgit at all. Indeed, it gets closer to
cogito but I still like cogito over plain git since it's easier to use
(my goal, though, is to add pull/clone commands to stgit so that one
doesn't need to rely on directly using other tools).
I am aware that, probably, the biggest problem with stgit is the
documentation (and also a lack of regression tests). I hope I will
find some time soon to write a tutorial and improve the command line
help. I will setup a wiki in the next few days so that others can
easily fix/update the documentation.
--
Catalin
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Recovery raid5 after sata cable failure.
From: Brad Campbell @ 2005-07-18 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Francisco Zafra; +Cc: 'Neil Brown', linux-raid
In-Reply-To: <42db7d1e.6cc951d1.55b4.ffffb383@mx.gmail.com>
Francisco Zafra wrote:
> Hi Neil,
> Since some hours I am trying to solved it with the last version:
> root@Torero-2:~ # mdadm --version
> mdadm - v2.0-devel-2 - DEVELOPMENT VERSION NOT FOR REGULAR USE - 7 July 2005
>
> With the same results :(
>
> I really don't think it is locked I dd it in act of desperation and I have
> no problems:
> root@Torero-2:~ # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdh bs=1k count=1000
> 1000+0 records in
> 1000+0 records out
> 1024000 bytes transferred in 0.417862 seconds (2450570 bytes/sec)
>
Asking a silly question perhaps..
fuser /dev/sdh
Regards,
Brad
--
"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability
to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable
for their apparent disinclination to do so." -- Douglas Adams
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: how to upgrade an installed iptables?
From: Jörg Harmuth @ 2005-07-18 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter
In-Reply-To: <3115d56e0507172241b07d0bf@mail.gmail.com>
afshin lamei schrieb:
> how can i upgrade from iptables 1.2.8 to 1.2.9, 1.3, ... etc? there is
> a patch named patch-iptables-1.2.8-1.2.9, can i apply it on an
> installed 1.2.8 one?
I did it with 1.3.1->1.3.2 and it worked well. If you decide to compile
your own iptables, you should take care of the paths. E.g. debian has
/sbin/iptables and the sources from netfilter.org install in
/usr/local/sbin. If you don't want this, edit the Makefile and chnge
vars PREFIX, LIBDIR,..., to fit your needs.
Have a nice time,
Joerg
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: 2.6.13-rc3-mm1 (ckrm)
From: Hirokazu Takahashi @ 2005-07-18 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pj; +Cc: akpm, hch, linux-kernel
In-Reply-To: <20050717082000.349b391f.pj@sgi.com>
Hi,
> > What, in your opinion, makes it "obviously unmergeable"?
Controlling resource assignment, I think that concept is good.
But the design is another matter that it seems somewhat overkilled
with the current CKRM.
> I suspect that the main problem is that this patch is not a mainstream
> kernel feature that will gain multiple uses, but rather provides
> support for a specific vendor middleware product used by that
> vendor and a few closely allied vendors. If it were smaller or
> less intrusive, such as a driver, this would not be a big problem.
> That's not the case.
I believe this feature would also make desktop users happier -- controlling
X-server, mpeg player, video capturing and all that -- if the code
becomes much simpler and easier to use.
> A major restructuring of this patch set could be considered, This
> might involve making the metric tools (that monitor memory, fork
> and network usage rates per task) separate patches useful for other
> purposes. It might also make the rate limiters in fork, alloc and
> network i/o separately useful patches. I mean here genuinely useful
> and understandable in their own right, independent of some abstract
> CKRM framework.
That makes sense.
> Though hints have been dropped, I have not seen any public effort to
> integrate CKRM with either cpusets or scheduler domains or process
> accounting. By this I don't mean recoding cpusets using the CKRM
> infrastructure; that proposal received _extensive_ consideration
> earlier, and I am as certain as ever that it made no sense. Rather I
> could imagine the CKRM folks extending cpusets to manage resources
> on a per-cpuset basis, not just on a per-task or task class basis.
> Similarly, it might make sense to use CKRM to manage resources on
> a per-sched domain basis, and to integrate the resource tracking
> of CKRM with the resource tracking needs of system accounting.
>From a standpoint of the users, CKRM and CPUSETS should be managed
seamlessly through the same interface though I'm not sure whether
your idea is the best yet.
Thanks,
Hirokazu Takahashi.
^ permalink raw reply
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.