similar to: shape downstream of a ppp link

Assertion failure in journal_add_journal_head() at fs/jbd/journal.c:1679 : "(((&bh->b_count)->counter) > 0) || (bh->b_page && bh->b_page->mapping)" ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/jbd/journal.c:1679! invalid operand: 0000 [#2] CPU: 0 EIP: 0060:[<c017637f>] Not tainted EFLAGS: 00010282 EIP is at

Author: cjj Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: a58472277959c34c37827af84da191ceba990899 Log message: 6398779 Need to reduce address limits for devices downstream of a BCM 5708/5714/5715 bridge Files: create: usr/src/uts/sparc/pxb_bcm/Makefile update: usr/src/cmd/pcidr/etc/SUNW,EC_dr,ESC_dr_req,sysevent.conf update: usr/src/pkgdefs/SUNWckr/prototype_sparc update:

Hi all, I asked about this in the ##xen irc channel a few days ago and had some help, but no luck. The problem is that my dom0 connects fine with WAN, but all domUs do not always connect to external hosts (though they can communicate in the LAN and with the gateway). I''ll try to post as much relevant information as I can think of and what all I have tried I disabled all dom0 and

I do have a bunch of genes ( nearly ~50000) from the whole genome, which read in genomic ranges A range(gene) can be seem as an observation has three columns chromosome, start and end, like that seqnames start end width strand gene1 chr1 1 5 5 + gene2 chr1 10 15 6 + gene3 chr1 12 17 6 + gene4 chr1 20 25 6 + gene5

On 12 May 2016 at 16:56, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> wrote: > In my opinion, it would be better overall for the LLVM project if > top-of-trunk is > tested as much as possible, if testing resources are so scarce that a > choice > has to be made between testing top-of-trunk or testing a release branch. > I agree that trunk is more important, with both of my

On Oct 18, 2018, at 6:52 PM, Japheth Cleaver <cleaver at terabithia.org> wrote: > > Conoboy, on the other hand, takes great pains during the speech to describe a much more fluid and complex interaction between CentOS and its upstream, and puts forth CentOS as a mechanism (perhaps the best mechanism) for the winder EL community to contribute (something?) back into RHEL's future. I

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 05:52:12PM -0700, Japheth Cleaver wrote: > The wider EL community is trapped between a rock and a hard place > somewhat. If you try to direct Fedora into the needs of EL users, > you stand a good chance of getting told to pound stand, and that EL > is getting in the way of bleeding-edge progress. Traditionally, For what it's worth (I hope something!) I

On 10/20/18 8:37 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > Oh, great, I now can see the world with your eyes! And last part about > servers life cycle wise doesn't sound much different from what I do using > FreeBSD and jails. The only difference is maybe in how frequently I have > to reboot Linux (any flavor) due to kernel or glibc security update > compared to reboot of FreeBSD. Yup.

On 10/20/18 7:42 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > I would like to hear the reasons of those who chose to use Fedora on their > server. Specifically what advantages one has found compared to other > alternatives. And also what kind of server that is. Single > user/home/family one? Serving some department or similar (say 100 people, > who may need services 24/7/365)? I know, this is just

<snip /> May I just add a few points 1) Won't get rid of forks - ever.. forget it 2) Branches are "free" - having a single branch for dumping things is unlikely to suit the needs of all the work by everyone 3) Having things consolidated in one more or less easy to find place is better than all over the damn place. ------------ I'd vote to give FBSD and anyone

Greetings, As of LLVM 5.0.1, LLVM generates a dependency on diaguids.lib if it finds DIA SDK available. This is ok, however llvm-config.exe does not expose the path to the library, so it results in these link errors: LLVMDebugInfoPDB.lib(DIASession.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "long __cdecl NoRegCoCreate(wchar_t const *,struct _GUID const &,struct _GUID const

Hi, It looks like LLVM's Phabricator started picking up downstream commits in Apple's fork of llvm-project (github.com/apple/llvm-project), and is creating notification events about all the old downstream commits, e.g. https://reviews.llvm.org/rG8910c5c786886f17a75bd142fa967932ca3f54c1 https://reviews.llvm.org/rGb03469c2d72621e1cccfeeaef719692600c075f4 This seems like a bug. Can this be

On Oct 18, 2013, at 7:07 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 06:47:51AM +0700, "C. Bergstr?m" wrote: >> <snip /> >> >> May I just add a few points >> >> 1) Won't get rid of forks - ever.. forget it >> 2) Branches are "free" - having a single branch for dumping things is >>

This adds support for querying the maximum clock rate of a downstream port on a DisplayPort connection. Generally, downstream ports refer to active dongles which can have their own pixel clock limits. Note as well, we also start marking the connector as disconnected if we can't read the DPCD, since we wouldn't be able to do anything without DPCD access anyway. Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul

On Thu, 12 May 2016 16:40:44 +0100 David Chisnall via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > The end result is that shortly after a release (sometimes every alternate release) is branched a load of downstream projects update to the new APIs, test things, and find a bunch of regressions that have been sitting in the tree for months. We then have to scrabble to bisect and try

Winston, the Mac CRAN build builds a package only if either is true: 1) the package has not passed checks 2) there is a new version of the package since last successful build+check The old build machine doesn't have the capacity to do full re-builds (it would take over 24h - currently the nightly build of packages takes 16-22 hours), but we're currently building a new setup for R 4.0.0

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 07:09:47PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > Hi all, > I mentioned this idea yesterday on IRC already and would like to discuss > in the greater context of the mailing list. NetBSD is about to import > LLVM and Clang into its repository; FreeBSD already has done that a > while ago. This creates some interesting maintainance questions. FreeBSD > has

On 19 Oct 2013, at 04:37, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > I agree. I don't see how a concept of "official vendor branches" is better than the concept of "stable" branches that take bugfixes. I think it would be simple and work well to just have vendors ask to get patches merged into 3.3.x or 3.4.x (whichever they are based on) stabilization

On 12 May 2016 at 16:57, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Errr, Stephen has spoken up here, but my folks are in contact with android > folks pretty much every week, and I don't think what you are stating is > correct on a lot of fronts. I obviously don't speak for Android and have already apologised to Steve about my choice of words. > So if android is

On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 06:47:51AM +0700, "C. Bergstr?m" wrote: > <snip /> > > May I just add a few points > > 1) Won't get rid of forks - ever.. forget it > 2) Branches are "free" - having a single branch for dumping things is > unlikely to suit the needs of all the work by everyone I think that having a single stable branch would be the most