- 23 Nov, 2007 40 commits
-
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
This may or may not fix the APM problems, and the INITRD ones. The INITRD one in particular was a case of a fairly inexplicable test that shouldn't have been there in the first place breaking when something completely unrelated was cleaned up.. The APM breakage was simply due to it being in the wrong place. The patch looks bigger than it really is - it really only moves the file to the proper directory, and makes sure that it should compile with the standard assembler.. Linus
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
I made a 117 to fix the silly things left in 116 in my excitement over it passing all my crashtests. This should fix the things with the kernel thinking it was out of memory much sooner than it actually was etc. Alan still reports some funnies with unix domain sockets, but he's reportedly fixed the behaviour of NFS over TCP. He didn't make it sound as if you really want to use it yet, though ;) Linus
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
I just released Linux-2.1.116. I've tested it fairly extensively on my SMP box, both with little memory and much, and I cannot make it lock up any more. Special thanks to Dean Gaudet who helped me set up a apache configuration that finally made me able to repeat the lockup, and made me able to debug the thing. Most of the 2.1.116 patches are "just" alpha and m68k updates, and can be ignored by most people. The bugfixes are, roughly: - fixed serious low-memory situation problem, where a critical resource allocation problem could result in nasy behaviour. Notably, doing TCP under low memory could result in TCP trying to allocate memory in a tight loop and locking out kswapd completely so that the situation would never be rectified. In short, the machine hung. This problem has been there forever, the only reason it doesn't show up under 2.0.x seems to be because under 2.0.x the TCP allocation was always for a single page, for which this situation never arises. Under 2.1.x the slab code forced multi-page allocations. If you've seen lockups with 2.1.x, this may be the cause. This was what held up 2.1.116 for so long. - various minor driver updates. Networking, radio, bttv. - NFS over TCP still doesn't work, but at least it fails due to new reasons. Alan, try your squid thing under 2.1.116. I suspect it will hold up now, Linus
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
Ok, we've been in a tentative code freeze for a long time, and now it's final. I've made a 2.1.115 that I hope is good enough, and I won't be accepting anything but bug-fixes until 2.2.. There are two long-standing patches that I'm still considering: - devfs - dynamic fd's and I kind of expect that they'll go in (devfs is configurable, so if you don't want it you don't need to care, and the dynamic fd's save some memory and speed certain things up a bit). The reason they're not in now is mainly that I've been trying to get everything else off my plate, and I want to ruminate on them in peace for a while. Bug-fixes are still (and will always be) accepted, Linus
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
thus inodes) under low-memory circumstances. It may be _too_ aggressive right now, but if so that just gives a good mid point to strive for. I'd really like to hear comments about how this "feels" (and numbers too, if you have them). It's fairly hard for me to judge, as whenever I run Linux on small-memory machines it always feels slower than I'm used to, regardless of whether Linux does the right thing or not ;) Linus
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
-
Linus Torvalds authored
Ok, it's out there now in all its glory... 2.1.109 does the following thing: - CPU detection in C code (and thus much easier to expand upon, especially as it's all thrown away after booting now that it is "initfunc()"). This should finally get the Cyrix case right, for example. Please test. - too meny people convinced me that sendfile() really wants to act like writep(). - sound driver updates from Alan. - console updates, so now we have the full old functionality again as far as I'm concerned (but I'm sure people will tell me something is still missing) - task switch and user space return cleanly handles bad segment descriptors etc, so people shoul dno longer be able to cause kernel messages by misusing the LDT (and I was just informed that you could actually completely hang a 2.1.x SMP kernel by doing nasty things - this fixes it) - wine should work again thanks to Bill Hawes (other LDT fixes) - de4x5 driver update - token ring driver update - ppp driver update - coda-fs update - "shared writable" bug fixed (thanks to a lot of people for testing and working on this - the actual fix was trivial once the problem was understood) In addition, I've spent a large part of my day running with a 12MB machine, and low-memory behaviour seems to be reasonable. People who have been unhappy with low-memory behaviour should check out 109 and comment on it - the heuristics are fairly different, and seem to be better. As of this release, I won't be looking at the "incoming" directory at the linux-patches site any more. I'll only be looking at "urgent" things, on the theory that I'm (a) lazy and (b) getting into code freeze. If you have important patches in "incoming", feel free to move them to "urgent". However, I will warn that if I don't consider them to be 2.2 material, I'll just move them to "discarded". The same goes for patches in email. I will accept patches, but I've just raised the bar for acception. Linus
-