* Re: [PATCH for review] [11/48] x86_64: During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group [not found] ` <20070719134840.47B5114E6E@wotan.suse.de> @ 2007-07-19 14:04 ` Christoph Hellwig 2007-07-19 14:14 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2007-07-19 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andi Kleen; +Cc: will_schmidt, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 03:48:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > From: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > > During a VM oom condition, kill all threads in the process group. > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad state > after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory condition. > > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a bad > state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for the > application to restart, or otherwise handled, and makes it very obvious that > something has gone wrong. > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather than just > the one thread. Shouldn't we have one patc hthat does this for every architecture instead of going through arch maintainers and probably losing half of them? > Index: linux/arch/x86_64/mm/fault.c > =================================================================== > --- linux.orig/arch/x86_64/mm/fault.c > +++ linux/arch/x86_64/mm/fault.c > @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ out_of_memory: > } > printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); > if (error_code & 4) > - do_exit(SIGKILL); > + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); > goto no_context; > > do_sigbus: ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for review] [11/48] x86_64: During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-19 14:04 ` [PATCH for review] [11/48] x86_64: During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group Christoph Hellwig @ 2007-07-19 14:14 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2007-07-19 15:03 ` Will Schmidt 2007-07-23 18:09 ` [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] " Will Schmidt 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2007-07-19 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Andi Kleen, will_schmidt, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 03:48:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > From: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > > > > During a VM oom condition, kill all threads in the process group. > > > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad state > > after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory condition. > > > > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a bad > > state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for the > > application to restart, or otherwise handled, and makes it very obvious that > > something has gone wrong. > > > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather than just > > the one thread. > > Shouldn't we have one patc hthat does this for every architecture instead > of going through arch maintainers and probably losing half of them? Yes, please ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org return -EMAINTAINER_TOO_BUSY ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH for review] [11/48] x86_64: During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-19 14:14 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2007-07-19 15:03 ` Will Schmidt 2007-07-23 18:09 ` [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] " Will Schmidt 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-19 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 16:14 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 03:48:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > From: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > > > > > > During a VM oom condition, kill all threads in the process group. > > > > > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad state > > > after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory condition. > > > > > > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a bad > > > state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for the > > > application to restart, or otherwise handled, and makes it very obvious that > > > something has gone wrong. > > > > > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather than just > > > the one thread. > > > > Shouldn't we have one patc hthat does this for every architecture instead > > of going through arch maintainers and probably losing half of them? > > Yes, please ;-) Ok, i'm convinced. :-) I'll spin up an all-arch encompassing patch in the next day or so. -Will > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > return -EMAINTAINER_TOO_BUSY ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-19 14:14 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2007-07-19 15:03 ` Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-23 18:09 ` Will Schmidt 2007-07-23 21:16 ` Andrew Morton 2007-07-31 9:31 ` Pavel Machek 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-23 18:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven, Andrew Morton Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group. We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad state after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory condition. Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a bad state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for the application to restart, or be otherwise handled, and makes it very obvious that something has gone wrong. This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather than just the one thread. Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> --- This patch hits all arches except for x86_64 and powerpc; those arches have already been updated with this change. diff --git a/arch/alpha/mm/fault.c b/arch/alpha/mm/fault.c index a0e18da..25154df 100644 --- a/arch/alpha/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/alpha/mm/fault.c @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ do_page_fault(unsigned long address, unsigned long mmcsr, current->comm, current->pid); if (!user_mode(regs)) goto no_context; - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); do_sigbus: /* Send a sigbus, regardless of whether we were in kernel diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm/mm/fault.c index 846cce4..59ed1d0 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/arm/mm/fault.c @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int fsr, struct pt_regs *regs) * the page fault gracefully. */ printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); return 0; } if (fault & VM_FAULT_SIGBUS) { diff --git a/arch/arm26/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm26/mm/fault.c index dec638a..df14681 100644 --- a/arch/arm26/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/arm26/mm/fault.c @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ int do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int fsr, struct pt_regs *regs) * us that made us unable to handle the page fault gracefully. */ printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); } else{ __do_user_fault(tsk, addr, fsr, fault == -1 ? SEGV_ACCERR : SEGV_MAPERR, regs); diff --git a/arch/avr32/mm/fault.c b/arch/avr32/mm/fault.c index ae2d2c5..11472f8 100644 --- a/arch/avr32/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/avr32/mm/fault.c @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: Killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/cris/mm/fault.c b/arch/cris/mm/fault.c index 8672ab7..8aab814 100644 --- a/arch/cris/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/cris/mm/fault.c @@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ do_page_fault(unsigned long address, struct pt_regs *regs, up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/frv/mm/fault.c b/arch/frv/mm/fault.c index 6798fa0..05093d4 100644 --- a/arch/frv/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/frv/mm/fault.c @@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ asmlinkage void do_page_fault(int datammu, unsigned long esr0, unsigned long ear up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (user_mode(__frame)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/i386/mm/fault.c b/arch/i386/mm/fault.c index 01ffdd4..2bc2592 100644 --- a/arch/i386/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/i386/mm/fault.c @@ -597,7 +597,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (error_code & 4) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/ia64/mm/fault.c b/arch/ia64/mm/fault.c index 73ccb60..320edf8 100644 --- a/arch/ia64/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/ia64/mm/fault.c @@ -273,6 +273,6 @@ ia64_do_page_fault (unsigned long address, unsigned long isr, struct pt_regs *re } printk(KERN_CRIT "VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; } diff --git a/arch/m32r/mm/fault.c b/arch/m32r/mm/fault.c index 676a1c4..70a766a 100644 --- a/arch/m32r/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/m32r/mm/fault.c @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (error_code & ACE_USERMODE) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/m68k/mm/fault.c b/arch/m68k/mm/fault.c index 578b48f..eaa6186 100644 --- a/arch/m68k/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/m68k/mm/fault.c @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ out_of_memory: printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); no_context: current->thread.signo = SIGBUS; diff --git a/arch/mips/mm/fault.c b/arch/mips/mm/fault.c index 521771b..5699c77 100644 --- a/arch/mips/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/mips/mm/fault.c @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/parisc/mm/fault.c b/arch/parisc/mm/fault.c index 7899ab8..1c091b4 100644 --- a/arch/parisc/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/parisc/mm/fault.c @@ -263,6 +263,6 @@ no_context: up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); printk(KERN_CRIT "VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; } diff --git a/arch/ppc/mm/fault.c b/arch/ppc/mm/fault.c index b98244e..94913dd 100644 --- a/arch/ppc/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/ppc/mm/fault.c @@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); return SIGKILL; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/fault.c b/arch/s390/mm/fault.c index 5405519..f5bd497 100644 --- a/arch/s390/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/s390/mm/fault.c @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static int do_out_of_memory(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long error_code, } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (regs->psw.mask & PSW_MASK_PSTATE) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); do_no_context(regs, error_code, address); return 0; } diff --git a/arch/sh/mm/fault.c b/arch/sh/mm/fault.c index 964c676..b0d5170 100644 --- a/arch/sh/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/sh/mm/fault.c @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/sh64/mm/fault.c b/arch/sh64/mm/fault.c index 0d069d8..dd81c66 100644 --- a/arch/sh64/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/sh64/mm/fault.c @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/sparc/mm/fault.c b/arch/sparc/mm/fault.c index 50747fe..e4d9c8e 100644 --- a/arch/sparc/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/sparc/mm/fault.c @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ out_of_memory: up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); printk("VM: killing process %s\n", tsk->comm); if (from_user) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto no_context; do_sigbus: diff --git a/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c b/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c index 17123e9..13fdfa3 100644 --- a/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c @@ -466,7 +466,7 @@ out_of_memory: up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (!(regs->tstate & TSTATE_PRIV)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); goto handle_kernel_fault; intr_or_no_mm: diff --git a/arch/xtensa/mm/fault.c b/arch/xtensa/mm/fault.c index 1600406..399df5c 100644 --- a/arch/xtensa/mm/fault.c +++ b/arch/xtensa/mm/fault.c @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ out_of_memory: } printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); if (user_mode(regs)) - do_exit(SIGKILL); + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); bad_page_fault(regs, address, SIGKILL); return; ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-23 18:09 ` [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] " Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-23 21:16 ` Andrew Morton 2007-07-24 14:28 ` Will Schmidt 2007-07-31 9:31 ` Pavel Machek 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2007-07-23 21:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: will_schmidt Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:09:45 -0500 Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group. > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad > state after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory > condition. > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a > bad state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for > the application to restart, or be otherwise handled, and makes it very > obvious that something has gone wrong. > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather > than just the one thread. Just checking... blackfin h8300 m68knommu uml v850 were not changed. Intentional? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-23 21:16 ` Andrew Morton @ 2007-07-24 14:28 ` Will Schmidt 2007-07-24 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-24 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 14:16 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:09:45 -0500 > Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group. > > > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad > > state after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory > > condition. > > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a > > bad state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for > > the application to restart, or be otherwise handled, and makes it very > > obvious that something has gone wrong. > > > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather > > than just the one thread. > > Just checking... > > blackfin > h8300 > m68knommu > uml > v850 > > were not changed. Intentional? Yes. Those arch's don't have the VM oom code that I could see. There is an occasional do_exit() reference elsewhere in the fault handler code, for reasons other than VM oom, so I deliberately didn't touch those either. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-24 14:28 ` Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-24 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2007-07-24 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Schmidt Cc: Andrew Morton, Geert Uytterhoeven, Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 09:28:44AM -0500, Will Schmidt wrote: > > Just checking... > > > > blackfin > > h8300 > > m68knommu > > uml > > v850 > > > > were not changed. Intentional? > > Yes. Those arch's don't have the VM oom code that I could see. There > is an occasional do_exit() reference elsewhere in the fault handler > code, for reasons other than VM oom, so I deliberately didn't touch > those either. Except for uml these are the !CONFIG_MMU only architectures, so that makes a lot of sense. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-23 18:09 ` [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] " Will Schmidt 2007-07-23 21:16 ` Andrew Morton @ 2007-07-31 9:31 ` Pavel Machek 2007-07-31 14:55 ` Will Schmidt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Pavel Machek @ 2007-07-31 9:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Will Schmidt Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Andrew Morton, Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch Hi! > > During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group. > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad > state after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory > condition. > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a > bad state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for > the application to restart, or be otherwise handled, and makes it very > obvious that something has gone wrong. > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather > than just the one thread. > > Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > diff --git a/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c b/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c > index 17123e9..13fdfa3 100644 > --- a/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c > +++ b/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c > @@ -466,7 +466,7 @@ out_of_memory: > up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); > printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); > if (!(regs->tstate & TSTATE_PRIV)) > - do_exit(SIGKILL); > + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); > goto handle_kernel_fault; > > intr_or_no_mm: is the printk still accurate (does it kill more than one process now)? Why does it print when it will not really kill the process? I see similar code across all the archs... would it make sense to create common helper... or is the helper too trivial? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group 2007-07-31 9:31 ` Pavel Machek @ 2007-07-31 14:55 ` Will Schmidt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Will Schmidt @ 2007-07-31 14:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pavel Machek Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Andrew Morton, Christoph Hellwig, Andi Kleen, linux-kernel, linux-arch On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 11:31 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group. > > > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad > > state after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory > > condition. > > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a > > bad state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for > > the application to restart, or be otherwise handled, and makes it very > > obvious that something has gone wrong. > > > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather > > than just the one thread. > > > > Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > > > diff --git a/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c b/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c > > index 17123e9..13fdfa3 100644 > > --- a/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c > > +++ b/arch/sparc64/mm/fault.c > > @@ -466,7 +466,7 @@ out_of_memory: > > up_read(&mm->mmap_sem); > > printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm); > > if (!(regs->tstate & TSTATE_PRIV)) > > - do_exit(SIGKILL); > > + do_group_exit(SIGKILL); > > goto handle_kernel_fault; > > > > intr_or_no_mm: > > is the printk still accurate (does it kill more than one process now)? I was going to double-check this morning.. but don't see where current->comm is copied into a new task_struct. I thought that all processes within the group had the same current->comm value, so figure this is OK. > Why does it print when it will not really kill the process? no idea.. > I see similar code across all the archs... would it make sense to > create common helper... or is the helper too trivial? The checks blocking flow into do_group_exit, like (regs->tstate & TSTATE_PRIV) for sparc64, or (user_mode(regs)) for powerpc, do vary across the arch's. The code could be rearranged to have a helper containing just the printk and the do_group_exit() call; but I'm not sure that would be an improvement. maybe a do_group_sigkill_if(condition); helper :-) -Will > Pavel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-07-31 14:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20070719348.540885000@suse.de>
[not found] ` <20070719134840.47B5114E6E@wotan.suse.de>
2007-07-19 14:04 ` [PATCH for review] [11/48] x86_64: During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group Christoph Hellwig
2007-07-19 14:14 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2007-07-19 15:03 ` Will Schmidt
2007-07-23 18:09 ` [PATCH respin, was PATCH for review] " Will Schmidt
2007-07-23 21:16 ` Andrew Morton
2007-07-24 14:28 ` Will Schmidt
2007-07-24 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-07-31 9:31 ` Pavel Machek
2007-07-31 14:55 ` Will Schmidt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).