similar to: differences between Para-Virtualization and Full-Virtualization?

Hi All, I am new to Asterisk. Now I got one question on the identifier parameter of the Dial() command. I saw as below: exten => 20,1,Dia(Zap/3/5551234). Would you please let me know the meaning of "5551234"? Thanks, Songtao -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi All, When I tried to write my dial plan as below for my FXO port, which connects one PSTN line: [from-pstn] exten =>s,1,Answer() exten =>s,n,Wait(1) exten =>_X.,1,Dial(DAHDI/1) exten =>_X.,n,Hangup I got the following message: Connected to Asterisk 1.6.2.13 currently running on fax (pid = 8154) Verbosity was 0 and is now 4 -- Starting simple switch on 'DAHDI/1-1'

hello, sorry that I post it here again, as I have already posted it on www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/. Now I am working on fedora6Xen,i.e. 2.6.20-1.2944.fc6xen .Several questions: 1. After I have installed the windowsXP, the XP OS of course needs to reboot, but then the WindowsXP is automatically closed. How can I restart it? And I use #virsh start , the domain will be running, but when I

I''m trying to install XenEnterprise with raid 1 for its OS drives but the installer doesn''t seem to have this ability. Is there some way to install it in raid 1? The reason I need this is in case the OS drive fails, the whole system doesn''t go down. Marco Jorge _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com

Hi at all! i'm trying to use glusterfs for the first time and have the following problem: I want to have two nodes. On node1 I have a raid1-sytem running in /raid/storage Both nodes see the other and now I try to create a volume. While I create the first volume on a fresh system (node1) for the first time, gluster said: volume create: glustervolume: failed: /raid/storage/ or a prefix of it

Hi, I have updated the kernel to 2.4.21-27.0.2 on Centos 3.4 (was 3.3 when I did the kernel update) and have modified grub.conf to use the single CPU kernel: # grub.conf generated by anaconda # # Note that you do not have to rerun grub after making changes to this file # NOTICE: You have a /boot partition. This means that # all kernel and initrd paths are relative to /boot/, eg. #

Greetings all, I'm a new user of Dovecot and want to say thanks for the great software. I am having a problem at the moment. I run a heterogeneous network with windows and Mac clients logging into a Fedora Linux 2 box running sendmail and previously UW-IMAP, but now Dovecot. I am using strictly pop3, plain authentication with mbox format. Every computer in the network is working fine with

Hi All, I was wondering if anyone knew of a way to notify or log when a specific remote port is openened? I have an old LDAP server that I am looking to get rid of, but there is still a few queries reaching it. The sytem authentication is setup correctly (as is Postfix), so I am thinking there must be some script or program that is setup to query the older LDAP server. I tried using lsof

Il 27/02/2014 13:11, David Vrabel ha scritto: >> > This patch adds para-virtualization support to the queue spinlock code >> > by enabling the queue head to kick the lock holder CPU, if known, >> > in when the lock isn't released for a certain amount of time. It >> > also enables the mutual monitoring of the queue head CPU and the >> > following

Il 27/02/2014 15:18, David Vrabel ha scritto: > On 27/02/14 13:11, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Il 27/02/2014 13:11, David Vrabel ha scritto: >>>>> This patch adds para-virtualization support to the queue spinlock code >>>>> by enabling the queue head to kick the lock holder CPU, if known, >>>>> in when the lock isn't released for a certain

Il 27/02/2014 16:22, Raghavendra K T ha scritto: > On 02/27/2014 08:15 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > [...] >>> But neither of the VCPUs being kicked here are halted -- they're either >>> running or runnable (descheduled by the hypervisor). >> >> /me actually looks at Waiman's code... >> >> Right, this is really different from pvticketlocks,

Il 13/03/2014 12:21, David Vrabel ha scritto: > On 12/03/14 18:54, Waiman Long wrote: >> This patch adds para-virtualization support to the queue spinlock in >> the same way as was done in the PV ticket lock code. In essence, the >> lock waiters will spin for a specified number of times (QSPIN_THRESHOLD >> = 2^14) and then halted itself. The queue head waiter will spins

On 06/12/2014 04:17 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:44:00AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> @@ -19,13 +19,46 @@ extern struct static_key virt_unfairlocks_enabled; >> * that the clearing the lock bit is done ASAP without artificial delay >> * due to compiler optimization. >> */ >> +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS >> +static

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 04:48:41PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > I don't have a good understanding of the kernel alternatives mechanism. I didn't either; I do now, cost me a whole day reading up on alternative/paravirt code patching. See the patches I just send out; I got the 'native' case with paravirt enabled to be one NOP worse than the native case without paravirt -- for

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:10:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > +static inline void pv_init_node(struct mcs_spinlock *node) > +{ > + struct pv_qnode *pn = (struct pv_qnode *)node; > + > + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct pv_qnode) > 5*sizeof(struct mcs_spinlock)); > + > + if (!pv_enabled()) > + return; > + > + pn->cpustate = PV_CPU_ACTIVE; > + pn->mayhalt =

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:53:27PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > The additional register pressure may just cause a few more register moves > which should be negligible in the overall performance . The additional > icache pressure, however, may have some impact on performance. I was trying > to balance the performance of the pv and non-pv versions so that we won't > penalize the pv

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:10:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > Since enabling paravirt spinlock will disable unlock function inlining, > a jump label can be added to the unlock function without adding patch > sites all over the kernel. But you don't have to. My patches allowed for the inline to remain, again reducing the overhead of enabling PV spinlocks while running on a real

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 01:15:53PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/24/2014 06:04 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:53:27PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > >>The additional register pressure may just cause a few more register moves > >>which should be negligible in the overall performance . The additional > >>icache pressure, however, may have

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 01:38:20PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/24/2014 04:54 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:10:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > > >>Since enabling paravirt spinlock will disable unlock function inlining, > >>a jump label can be added to the unlock function without adding patch > >>sites all over the kernel.

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 01:38:20PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 10/24/2014 04:54 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:10:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > > >>Since enabling paravirt spinlock will disable unlock function inlining, > >>a jump label can be added to the unlock function without adding patch > >>sites all over the kernel.