similar to: Patch for kernel 2.4.14pre7

Remove ptep_test_and_clear_{dirty|young} from i386, and instead use the dominating functions, ptep_clear_flush_{dirty|young}. This allows the TLB page flush to be contained in the same macro, and allows for an eager optimization - if reading the PTE initially returned dirty/accessed, we can assume the fact that no subsequent update to the PTE which cleared accessed / dirty has occurred, as the

I am sure this is doable but I can''t find a specific example and my brain is frazzled. Basically, I am doing a whole load of in-place editing and need methods to support the updates. Here is what I am doing now: def set_blog_website faq = Faq.find(params[:id]) faq.blog_website = params[:value] faq.save! @faq = faq do_ret end Surely there is a generic way I can

Lo, Is there already a patch out for latest 2.4.6-ac release? I'm pretty sure that the ext3 patch -ac2 can not be applied on this release. Bye. -- the trees the birds the air the grass the water the flies the trees

Make parameter names match function argument names for the yet to be defined pte_update_defer accessor. Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> diff -r c7f79c35c160 include/asm-i386/pgtable.h --- a/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h Thu Oct 19 03:03:24 2006 -0700 +++ b/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h Thu Oct 19 03:11:31 2006 -0700 @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ do { \ do { \ if (dirty)

Make parameter names match function argument names for the yet to be defined pte_update_defer accessor. Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> diff -r c7f79c35c160 include/asm-i386/pgtable.h --- a/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h Thu Oct 19 03:03:24 2006 -0700 +++ b/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h Thu Oct 19 03:11:31 2006 -0700 @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ do { \ do { \ if (dirty)

Add a pte_update_hook which notifies about pte changes that have been made without using the set_pte / clear_pte interfaces. This allows shadow mode hypervisors which do not trap on page table access to maintain synchronized shadows. It also turns out, there was one pte update in PAE mode that wasn't using any accessor interface at all for setting NX protection. Considering it is PAE

From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> From: Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com> From: Himanshu Raj <rhim@cc.gatech.edu> [patch 9/9] Guest page hinting: full s390 support. s390 uses the milli-coded ESSA instruction to set the page state. The page state is formed by four guest page states called block usage states and three host page states called block content

From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> From: Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com> From: Himanshu Raj <rhim@cc.gatech.edu> [patch 9/9] Guest page hinting: full s390 support. s390 uses the milli-coded ESSA instruction to set the page state. The page state is formed by four guest page states called block usage states and three host page states called block content

Add pte_flags() to extract the flags from a pte. This is a special case of pte_val() which is only guaranteed to return the pte's flags correctly; the page number may be corrupted or missing. The intent is to allow paravirt implementations to return pte flags without having to do any translation of the page number (most notably, Xen). Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge

Add pte_flags() to extract the flags from a pte. This is a special case of pte_val() which is only guaranteed to return the pte's flags correctly; the page number may be corrupted or missing. The intent is to allow paravirt implementations to return pte flags without having to do any translation of the page number (most notably, Xen). Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge

Hey gang, There must be any easy solution for this but my mind is frazzled on compiling 2.4 with RTC as module. Bleh. Currently extension 9000 is our VoicemailMain(@company) line. Some employee's are complaining that the old system was better because you didn't have to enter your mailbox number and that instead the old system took you right to it. I figured there was something similar

From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens at de.ibm.com> From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger at de.ibm.com> This patch changes the s390 memory management defintions to use the pgste field for dirty and reference bit tracking of host and guest code. Usually on s390, dirty and referenced are tracked in storage keys, which belong to the physical page. This changes with virtualization:

I tried setting CFLAGS="-g -O" in config.site and got the same errors from running ``make check''. Then I tried setting CC=cc in config.site, and the damned thing failed again (but differently). Now at least ``!is.nan(var(1))'' is TRUE, as it should be. The problem comes from lapack. At the end of .../test/Examples/base-Ex.Rout.fail we find: > loc <-

From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> From: Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com> From: Himanshu Raj <rhim@cc.gatech.edu> [patch 6/9] Guest page hinting: writable page table entries. The volatile state for page cache and swap cache pages requires that the host system needs to be able to determine if a volatile page is dirty before removing it. This excludes

From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> From: Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com> From: Himanshu Raj <rhim@cc.gatech.edu> [patch 6/9] Guest page hinting: writable page table entries. The volatile state for page cache and swap cache pages requires that the host system needs to be able to determine if a volatile page is dirty before removing it. This excludes

I've managed to install CentOS 6 on a 192MB virtual machine using LiveCD install-to-disk graphical method. This is not normally possible because of: - hard-coded minimum supported memory in Anaconda installer - it will show a message "You do not have enough RAM to install CentOS Linux on this machine" if you try or force you to use seriously crippled text installer; - a bug in

Hi all, today we've encountered quite strange issues with memory allocation on one of our VPS running CentOS 6.2. So far I've been unable to determine what's causing it - hopefully someone here will know what's up. The VPS is a "small" machine - just 512MB of RAM, 1 CPU, running 6.2. with current kernel (2.6.32-220.4.2.el6.x86_64, but I've tried the

Has anyone tried LFS (ie >2G files support) and Ext3 together? Are there good reasons why this should/should not work? I see the RH enterprise kernel patch set specifically does not attempt both lfs and ext3, but the lfs patches themselves touch some reasonably localised parts of ext2, so I would hope (without having dived in there to test), that the ext3 changes would mirror that

Which version should I use out of the list? Or do I install all of them, one after the other? ext3-2.4-0.9.9-2410p4.gz 05Sep01 (Against 2.4.10-pre4) (Changelog) ext3-2.4-0.9.9-249ac9.gz 05Sep01 (Against 2.4.9-ac9) ext3-2.4-0.9.10-2410.gz 23Sep01 (Against 2.4.10) (Changelog) patch-rml-2.4.10-ac3-ext3-0.9.9-with-dir-speedup-1.gz 01Oct01 (From Robert Love. Unofficial :-))

Which version should I use out of the list? Or do I install all of them, one after the other? ext3-2.4-0.9.9-2410p4.gz 05Sep01 (Against 2.4.10-pre4) (Changelog) ext3-2.4-0.9.9-249ac9.gz 05Sep01 (Against 2.4.9-ac9) ext3-2.4-0.9.10-2410.gz 23Sep01 (Against 2.4.10) (Changelog) patch-rml-2.4.10-ac3-ext3-0.9.9-with-dir-speedup-1.gz 01Oct01 (From Robert Love. Unofficial :-))