/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2009/03/25/#ubuntu-kernel.txt

tjaaltonapw: I noticed that you were assigned to bug 25629609:09
ubot3Malone bug 256296 in linux "USB id 0af0:6911 should use hso and not 'option' driver" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/25629609:09
apwtjaalton, hrm ... 09:09
tjaaltonI've got a similar(ish) device, id 0af0:7011 that uses option by default, but removing it and loading hso doesn't seem to work09:09
tjaalton:)09:09
apwhm i didn't remember it, as it seems to have been one where a stable update fixed it for us09:10
apwso i didn't really do anything to it :)09:10
tjaaltonbummer09:11
tjaaltonthis one doesn't work in jaunty, but I'll go hunt a patch for it09:11
apwwhen you say removing it and loading hso, do you mean litteraly just rmmod modprobe?09:11
tjaaltonyes09:11
tjaaltonprobably isn't enough09:12
apwthat i wouldn't expect to do anything, one of them will be tied to that PCI id09:12
* apw checks09:12
tjaaltonright..09:12
Kanohi, is anybody working on 2.6.29 today09:12
Kanothe acpi dir is missing from header package09:12
apwyeah hso has those usb id's in it09:13
apwdrivers/net/usb/hso.c:{default_port_device(0x0af0, 0x7011)},09:14
apwso i would have expected that one to be loaded not option09:14
apwbut that is what you wanted me thinks?09:14
tjaaltondoes it need an entry in unusual_devs.h?09:14
apwis it a disk?09:14
tjaaltonboth09:14
apwthat is for storage09:14
tjaaltonthe storage part has windows drivers..09:15
apwit only needs an entry there if is its broken09:15
apwie non-standard in some way09:15
tjaaltonhttps://lists.one-eyed-alien.net/pipermail/usb-storage/2009-January/004498.html09:15
apwthats not the same id's tho09:15
tjaaltonno, but similar fashion09:16
apwyou could try duplicating that one09:17
apwand putting your id's on it09:17
apwassuming you have nothing on it you care about09:18
tjaaltonnope09:18
apwyou presumably are ok making your own kernels to test this?09:21
apwyou should file a bug for this either way of course09:21
tjaaltonyes, sure09:22
tjaaltonsigh, hal should've picked it up but didn't09:28
tjaaltonor maybe it really needs the kernel patch first09:32
apwKeybuk, hey ... was it you who told me they had tried booting in OnDemand and it was slower09:40
Kanotjaalton: do you play with aufs?09:44
tjaaltonKano: no09:46
Kanoanybody else?09:46
tjaaltonapw: silly question; how do I get the correct hex values for UNUSUAL_DEV? the first two are obvious, but the rest aren't09:55
apwthe first two are the usb id, the next two are the bcdDevice range, low, high09:57
apwi see in the one you are copying they are 0000 and 9999 so use those09:57
apwie _all_ devices in that id09:57
tjaaltonok, thanks09:58
=== mdz_ is now known as mdz
tjaaltonapw: tried this http://users.tkk.fi/~tjaalton/foo/option-7011.diff but it didn't seem to work11:09
tjaaltonduh11:10
apw?11:10
tjaaltonmaybe I should've used US_FL_IGNORE_DEVICE instead of 011:10
apwheh11:10
tjaaltonbecause jaunty doesn't have option_ms_init, the "0" was a leftover from the other patch11:11
_rubenwhen having just ssh access at your disposal .. how can one increase the entropy pool? .. generating a 2048 rsa key on a remote seems to have stalled11:21
loolapw: Given you last touched the prerm, I think you'd be the best person to review the proposed changes to fix https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/34839511:36
ubot3Malone bug 348395 in linux "Leaves /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/*.bin files behind" [Undecided,New] 11:36
apwlool ack11:37
apwas in i'll look11:37
NCommanderThe lpia configuration currently has CONFIG_ATA as a module, can we change that to be compiled in? Its causing the installer to break down and cry since it can't find the HDD or the CD-ROM11:37
apwlool there is no fix on there11:37
NCommander(I'd actually like to copy the current i386 config to lpia, since there are quite a few differences it seems11:38
apwbut its also a duplicate of a bug which is in progress11:38
apwi'll get it sorted out11:38
loolapw: There's a description of what to change, which is to list the three files in the @files_to_remove array11:38
apwlool.  yes indeed11:39
loolWhich I think is as long to do for someone than merging a patch or a git tree, but really much faster for me11:39
apwthanks for the heads up11:39
loolapw: Didn't find the duplicate though, sorry11:39
apwdon't worry i never ever find anything in launchpad either11:40
apwits search and i do not get on11:40
lool(I only found users with this issue in forums etc. when googling)11:40
apwdammit launchpad is soooo slow11:40
=== lool changed the topic of #ubuntu-kernel to: Ubuntu kernel development discussion ONLY | Kernel Wiki: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam | Latest news: Released 2.6.28 kernel for Jaunty/9.04. | Kernel git trees: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git | Latest kernel upload: 2.6.28-11.36 based on 2.6.28.8 final
lool(removed quotes in topic)11:40
loolapw: Today?11:41
lool:-P11:41
apwnow, always,11:41
apwyou watch anyone who uses it a lot11:41
apwand they have loads of tab based tricks to get round its immense slowness11:41
apwprefetching bugs and stuff11:41
loolYeah, I don't think I would notice if it becomes fast in the future, I'll continue loading pages in the background while context switching to something else11:42
apwheh see, you do it too11:42
loolYeah, and my ADSL doesn't help, it's sluggish and loses packets; anyway => lunch &11:43
NCommandersecond question, is there an easy way to build the lpia kernel on amd64?11:48
tjaaltonapw: huh, hso claims that "not our device" when modprobing it12:05
tjaaltonsorry, "Not our interface"12:05
tjaaltonlooking at hso.c doesn't list the id as USB_DEVICE12:06
Kanohi rtg , did you get what i worte yesterday, that the acpi dir is missing from 2.6.29 header package? I have no idea how to fix it, please do12:06
apwKano, wahts the bug number12:06
Kanoi guess there is none,because the error is in git only12:07
Kanobut the result of this problem is that: http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617312:07
Kanothe correct fglrx patch does not work due to missing files12:07
apwif the headers package is missing files, then its a bug on your machine.  so lets get a bug filed12:07
apwwe have someone looking at a different missing header at the moment and would make sense to fix both at the same time12:08
Kanothe headers are installed, that dir is new and missing12:08
Kanohttp://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-karmic.git;a=tree;f=include/acpi;h=5ef3a2cd591223bf069be60037f2c576023752aa;hb=HEAD12:08
Kanothats new12:08
apwbang all that info in a bug and let me know the number12:09
Kanobut somehow i do not even see that acpica subdir in it...12:10
apwthe directories which get put in there are selected manually12:11
Kanoi guess that acpica sub dir inside acpi is created when you compile it12:15
Kanoor it is completely missing there as it is in drivers/acpi/acpica/acconfig.h12:17
Kanobut fglrx needs those includes somehow12:17
IntuitiveNippleapw: ping (re bug #337929)12:19
ubot3Malone bug 337929 in linux-backports-modules-2.6.28 "ieee80211_regdom=EU now causes oops after latest update" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/33792912:19
apwIntuitiveNipple, hi ... wassup?12:20
IntuitiveNippleapw: got a couple of minutes to discuss ^^^12:20
apwsure12:20
IntuitiveNippleapw: I debugged it last evening based on max's oops log and building the same version lbm and tracing the disassembly.12:21
apwok, what did yo ufind12:22
apwcan't say i've done much with it as yet12:22
IntuitiveNippleapw: It got to the point I was bog/bug-eyed and not clear in my thinking because I chased down several false trails, *but* I think the reason for the bug is an off-by-one or out-of-bounds write issue12:22
apwok makes sense12:23
rtgIntuitiveNipple: I think you ought to be able to produce the same result with 2.6.29. If thats the case, you could annoy the upstream guys with this bug.12:23
IntuitiveNippleThe crux of the issue *seems* to be that in wiphy_update_regulatory() at the end is a test on wiphy->reg_notifier12:24
IntuitiveNippleIf that is non-zero it is expected to be a function call-back pointer12:24
apwand what we putting in there12:25
IntuitiveNippleI may be wrong here because I was getting tired, but I'm pretty sure what is happening is in the wiphy struct that pointer is stored immediately after the bands[xxx] array pointers, and the value in it is 0x00000004 - I *think* bands[xxxxx] is going out of bounds and writing into reg_notifier12:25
IntuitiveNipplecausing the attempt to call the function 12:26
apwthat would be bad ... will have a look12:26
IntuitiveNippleIt's annoying to trace, I got lost in all the back-n-forth. 12:27
IntuitiveNippleMy other question about it is, find out what max has in the module options setting - is the setting he has for the lbm_cw_cfg80211 module or cfg80211 12:27
apwyeah its not at all clear fromt ehb ug12:28
apwthough he's not dumb12:28
apwit should fail to laod if its for the normal module12:28
apwyou filed the bug for that one i think12:28
=== Omegamoon is now known as Omegamoon|work
IntuitiveNippleBecause there is another potential issue I discovered: when we have OLD_REGULATORY enabled *and* CRDA in use, there's some unusual code paths and potential forced changes to the domain/bands that could potentially lead to this issue. I didn't find evidence of that, but had the suspicion12:29
IntuitiveNippleNo, you misunderstand me... I was wondering if the module option was being picked up by lbm_cw_cfg80211 even though it is set for cfg80211. I wondered that because at one point I was doubting the symbol munging12:30
Keybukapw: yes12:30
IntuitiveNippleLater I resolved some of those doubts but... :)12:31
apwKeybuk, i forget what i asked, damn12:31
Keybukapw: whether I said booting with ondemand was slower12:31
apwahh yes, thanks12:31
apwKeybuk, that needs recording somewhere so we don't think its a good idea to undo it again12:32
Keybukdo we have somewhere where we record kernel config decisions?12:32
apwi am suspecting not, and that we should12:32
apwrtg do we have a wiki page with anything about our config that you remember?12:33
rtgapw: we did something for the last UDS, but I've lost track of it.12:33
apwyeha we did didn't we12:34
apwwe could do with a meta something pointing to that12:34
apwand listing generaly things like this12:34
IntuitiveNipplewas it this? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/Specs/BootPerformance12:35
IntuitiveNipplewhich links to: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/2.6.28-2-generic-config12:35
apwyeah that later one12:35
tjaaltonapw: ok, adding the usb id in hso.c makes it load the module, but it still says "Not our interface", grr12:37
Kanortg: http://kanotix.com/files/kernel/unused-patches/2.6.29-ubuntu-aufs-compile-fix.patch12:40
Kanortg: that patch works against current git, please commit12:41
apwKeybuk, ok have recorded it here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelTeam/KernelConfig12:43
mdzapw: can I get an update on bug 319825?  it's in progress / assigned to you12:48
ubot3Malone bug 319825 in linux "acer_wmi in Jaunty on Aspire One exposes non-functional (always disabled) rfkill device" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/31982512:48
smb_tpmdz, I believe the current state is that we are intending to selectively disable the software rfkil for the aa112:50
mdzsmb_tp: thanks, so it should be fixed shortly after beta?12:50
smb_tpmdz, Yes12:51
apwmdz.  it looks very much like t12:51
apwthe rfkill is not required, and we will want to quirk it away for this device12:51
apwoh what smb_tp said ... doh12:51
smb_tpapw, sorry I thought I jump in for you12:52
apwi have half a patch to do that.  need to clean it up and get smb_tp to re-test12:52
apwsmb_tp, no was fine, just not reading whats in front of me12:52
rtgapw: I'm feeling dumb this morning. How do I rebase a branch _onto_ master, assuming I've checked out the branch under consideration?13:03
apwis you want all the non common commits then its just git rebase master13:03
apwif you are doing a rebase of the top 20 commits from here to master13:03
apwits git rebase --onto master <last commit before the ones you want> <branch name>13:04
rtgapw: where '<last commit before the ones you want>' is on the branch ?13:05
apwyeah, say you want the last three then its the pointer to the commit before those13:05
apwHEAD~4 sort of thing13:05
rtgapw: ok, thats a bit more intuitive13:05
apwfor next time you can tag the new place13:06
apwie tag master now with 'base-point'13:06
apwand then it become git rebase --onto master base-point <branch>13:06
rtgapw: ok, that ain't working for me. what I want is to take the 4 extra commits that I have on my branch and plop them on top of master. 'git checkout lp152626;git rebase --onto master HEAD~4 lp152626' didn't do the right thing.13:11
apwhrm what did it do instead?13:12
rtgapw: it sis some shit, but not what I wanted. master did not end up with those 4 commits.13:12
rtgs/sis/did/13:12
apwhrm, that should be the right incantion as far as i understand the world13:13
apwit should reset to master, then move the commits which git log HEAD~4..lp152626 would have shown13:13
apwif you have the text it produced on your window i'd like to see it13:14
rtgapw: if I checkout master, HEAD is _not_ one of the commits from the branch.13:14
apwright, but its supposed to be expanded before the command starts13:14
rtgapw: here it is exactly:13:15
* apw goes test13:15
rtgrtg@lochsa:~/jaunty/kern/ubuntu-jaunty$ git rebase --onto master HEAD~4 lp15262613:15
rtgFirst, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it...13:15
rtgApplying Revert Staging: at76_usb: update drivers/staging/at76_usb w/ mac80211 port13:15
rtgApplying Staging: at76_usb: fix bugs introduced by "Staging: at76_usb: cleanup dma on stack issues"13:15
rtgApplying Staging: at76_usb: Add support for OQO Model 01+13:15
rtgApplying UBUNTU: Enabled drivers/staging/at76_usb13:15
apwand are those 4 commits the ones you wanted?13:15
rtgyep13:15
apwso that looks like it did the right thing to me13:15
rtgshould I be _on_ master when I rebase?13:15
apwnope on lp15262613:16
apwand you should end up on thre still13:16
apwie the lpNNN is modified to be based on master13:16
rtgcorrect, but none of those commits ended up in master anywhere13:16
apwright master is not modified13:17
apwyou asked for this branch to be remade relative to master13:17
apwnow it will merge into master as a fast-forward13:17
rtgapw: no, what I want is for the unique commits in the branch to get plopped on top of master.13:17
apwok there is no single command to do that that i know of13:18
apwwhat i would do is the rebase that you did13:18
apwand then git checkout master; git merge lpNNNN13:18
apwand it should simply fast-forward master13:18
apwand you are done13:18
rtgI really dislike merging.13:19
apwas a complete asside from the man page the last lpNNNN on the rebase is optional as you are on there13:19
apwrtg rigth, but it won't be a merge13:19
apwif it makes a merge, ie. does not say fast-forward then it went wrong13:19
apwand in the fast-forward case master is effectivly13:19
apwgit reset --hard lpNNNN13:19
apwgit merge which says fast-forward is not a merge at all13:20
rtgapw: the merge appears to have done what I wanted. How do I get rid of the 'Merge branch' message? It doesn't mean anything outside of my local repo13:21
apwdid it not say fast-forward?13:22
apwthere will be no merge commit in that case13:22
apwif there is a merge commit it did not do what you wanted13:22
apwas you just rebased lpNNN onto master, ie it should be relative to master and based on master13:22
rtgapw: nope, it did not say fast-forward. 13:22
apwa merge cannot be anything other than a fast-forwar13:23
apwif it makes a merge life has gone bad13:23
apwthe way i do an update is as follows13:23
apwgit checkout master13:23
rtgwhich is why I dislike merges. maybe I'll just go with cherry-picking13:23
apwgit merge origin/master13:23
apwgit checkout lpNNN; git rebase master13:23
apwgit checkout master; git merge lpNNN13:24
apwnone of that ever should make a real merge commit, ever13:24
apwand then push13:24
apwthe first two make my master the same as upstream.  git checkout master; git reset --hard origin/master in effect13:25
apwthen i get my branch connected to the tip of master, and then merge it in13:25
apwand that can never be a real merge13:25
rtgapw: ok, that worked as expected. I think its the 'git checkout lpNNN; git rebase master' step that syncs the root commit tree13:25
cooloney_apw, i submitted the patch to fix that missing files to remove13:26
apwright that line is rebuiliding things from master upwards13:26
apwthen it can only ever be a ff of master13:26
apwby definition, and thus merge will do the right thing13:26
apwthe reason i use merge instead of reset, is if i have done something wrong13:26
apwi get a merge commit and go OOOPS and can unpick it easily13:26
apwcooloney_, sounds good13:28
=== cooloney_ is now known as cooloney
cooloneyapw, my nick is a typo. -:))13:29
apwheh13:29
IntuitiveNippleThis works for me with master=1,2,5 wip=3,4 ... git rebase --onto master HEAD~2 wip ends up with 1,2,5,3,413:29
cooloneyactually, it takes me a long time to recompile the jaunty kernel and tested it on my amd64 machine13:30
Kanortg: that patch works against current git, please commit13:32
Kanoerr, did not want to repeat it ;) but would be nice if you would do13:32
Kanoi checked that the driver/acpi/acpia makefile is in the header package but no header13:33
apwright headers other than those which are exposed via the official userspace headers are manually selected13:33
apwfile a bug asking for them and we can get then in there13:33
Kanoapw: tell me where to add those13:34
Kanothen i will try13:34
apwdo you have a fobia of bug trackers?13:34
rtgKano: I've already said that _if_ aufs is enabled, it won't happen until _after_ I talk to the installer people about upstream alternatives.13:34
Kanothat kernel is not released, so how to make a bug against it13:34
apwthere is a bug in progress right now to re-add some headers which are missing13:34
apwit would go in the same spot, there is a commit in the hardy tree to export13:35
apwsome drm headers for lum13:35
Kanortg: you can use something else,but what hurts if a module is built?13:35
apwit will be similar to those13:35
Kanothe module works13:35
Kanoif you want to fix unionfs or use whatever that is not important13:35
Kanobut it is needed to have a least one of those modules to build live images13:36
apwkano, the patch to put the first set of headers in has this subject: UBUNTU: Copy header files for various kernel media13:37
Kanook, found it, will try13:39
Kanomandriva simply adds all .h files to the devel package13:42
Kanoapw: can you tell me how to disable the virtual package when you build the server kernel?13:43
apwnot sure there is any way without editing the configs13:44
apwthat makes the thing double in size, i have already starrted the discussion on whether that is acceptable13:44
Kanoi see no real reason to have got the same kernel in 2 packages13:45
Kanoif it is stripped from some modules or not, that does not really matter13:46
NCommanderrtg, ping, I'd like to discuss with you changing the lpia config to match that of the i386, especially w.r.t.  to CONFIG_ATA which should hopefully fix d-i on lpia; unfortunately, making that config change would cause an ABI bump, so I'm not sure the best solution. Any ideas?14:01
apwIntuitiveNipple, which version of lbm were you seeng this regulatory oops with?14:07
IntuitiveNippleI haven't reproduced it 'in real life' - I was reverse-engineering the oops in the report, using the same build as max reported (2.6.28-8 I think?)14:09
IntuitiveNippleThat's my next step. I've just put a build-server together to produce custom debug builds14:11
apwi jsut tried it here on 2.6.28-11 and it lets me do it14:11
apwand it also even seems to work14:11
IntuitiveNippleis your module-list comparable to the list in the oops report?14:11
apwi am only loading the base cfg driver which explodes14:12
rtgNCommander: send a pull request to the k-t list. I assume you've coordinated this request with sconklin ?14:12
apwIntuitiveNipple, the problem is is don't have an ath9k ... so its not 100% trivial to test14:13
apwIntuitiveNipple, i am not convinced that this is the call at the bottom of the function btw14:14
sconklinrtg, NCommander: no. This would be a good one to review at the sprint, since it falls right into the netbook repo changeover14:14
NCommanderrtg, no, I've need working out what specifically has gone boom with d-i on lpia, and I got pointed to you.14:14
apwas the fault is not a jump to 0x000004 but a data reference to 0x0000414:14
NCommandersconklin, I have a branch which has the updated config, but I'm not sure what to do about the ABI bump (its too large to ignore, since a lot of things move around, and a LOT of new symbols ...)14:15
sconklinNCommander: that's why it needs to be reviewed by the kernel-team mailing list, an ABI bump touches a lot of projects at the moment.14:16
sconklinso please do a git-format-patch, and send that to the mailing list. Which hardy repo is your change against? (I hate that I even have to ask that)14:17
NCommandersconklin, er, this is jaunty.14:17
NCommandernot hardy14:17
sconklinNCommander: Oh, well then that's a lot easier. Still send a patch to the mailing list, but it's much less complicated from a project management view14:18
NCommandersconklin, sure, I haven't finished doing a test build with the bumped ABI, so I'll probably push it in an hour or so14:18
sconklinNCommander: cool, thanks14:19
rtgsconklin: why are we caring about Jaunty lpia? do we have products based on it? 14:19
apwIntuitiveNipple, bah no this is only triggered if you have a card reporting a phy14:21
IntuitiveNippleahhh, what hardware were you testing on?14:22
* NCommander sighs14:22
NCommanderEE: Missing modules (start begging for mercy)14:22
apwsomething without wifi :)14:22
sconklinNo, I only care about jaunty lpia because 1) I'm responsible in a general sense for lpia maintenance and 2) Future development projects will soon be based on jaunty. There's nothing in progress that would affect a decision about lpia in jaunty.14:22
NCommanderNow what do I do?14:22
IntuitiveNippleapw: :p14:22
apwadd a modules.ignore file listing the modukes wh14:22
apwwhich are gone to the abi directory14:23
apwIntuitiveNipple, heh i tried :)14:23
rtgNCommander: I'm not at all interested in ABI bumping config changes for no particular reason, other then homogenizing i386 and lpia14:23
IntuitiveNippleapw: I'll carry on with the debug once I've got the server to behave... installed Jaunty on it earlier, great. Then decided to move the live /var to a separate LVM, but now, for some reason, mountkernfs.sh fails to mount the varrun and varlock tmpfs so networking doesn't start. Interesting Times.14:24
apwdo you have the h/w ?14:25
IntuitiveNippleapw: Yeah... tons of it14:25
apwheh one day i need to sit you down with some beer ...14:25
IntuitiveNippleorange juice is better for you :)14:25
IntuitiveNippleright... back to the cold windy shed to fix the server :(14:26
apwIntuitiveNipple, ok i think i have found a very compelling bug14:38
apwi will build a fixed version (i hope) and upload it for testing14:39
IntuitiveNippleThe lbm_cw_cfg80211 ?14:39
apwthe regulatory oops in in lbm yes.14:40
apwthink i can see how it can happen14:40
apwnot that i can trigger it without an ath5k14:40
apwwill write it up in the patch, so you can see what i found14:41
IntuitiveNippleok :)14:41
rtgIntuitiveNipple: speaking of wireless, I think huaxu.wan@linux.intel.com awaits an updated patch from you for the rfkill oops.14:51
IntuitiveNipplertg: Apparently the whole rfkill patch series isn't upstream yet. I got the impression the alternate work-around was being done14:52
IntuitiveNipplertg: it's still sloppy programming having work queued after the module is exiting14:54
rtgIntuitiveNipple: Helmut's comment didn't make _any_ sense to me. Regardless, we still have this problem for 2.6.28.14:54
rtgIntuitiveNipple: I think it goes a bit beyond sloppy :)14:55
IntuitiveNipplertg: I'll test a V2 of my patch for you, and get it posted to the list14:55
IntuitiveNipplertg: I was trying to be polite, since we're being logged :D14:55
* maxb waves: I may not be immediately responsive, but I'm semi-around if you want testing for that lbm regulatory oops14:55
IntuitiveNipplemaxb: whilst you're here. The module option... is it "options lbm_cw_cfg80211 ieee802.... " ?14:56
maxbieee80211_regdom=EU14:59
IntuitiveNipplemaxb: this is in /etc/modprobe.d/options.conf ? I want to verify the module name specified is lbm_cw_cfg8021115:02
maxbYes (I may have had one of the underscores as a hyphen, but IIUC those are equivalent in module names)15:03
IntuitiveNippleno, that's fine. I had a suspicion it was matching on cfg8011 because the symbol munging looked 'off' but that answers that one :)15:05
Kanortg: cp -a drivers/acpi/acpica/*.h $(indep_hdrdir)/drivers/acpi/acpica15:39
Kanoplease add that15:39
Kanomainly for fglrx15:40
Kano2.6.29 only15:40
Kanoyou just added some others, i never needed em but why not.15:43
mjg59What the fuck is fglrx doing consuming stuff from acpica?15:49
mjg59That's so far outside the exported API it's not even funny15:49
Kanowell there is no official patch for 2.6.29 + fglrx, but the unofficial ones needs it15:53
mjg59Then it's very, very broken15:53
Kanoi guess you have to wait 3 month for a real one ;)15:53
Kanowhen 2.6.30 out or so *g*15:54
mjg59The only code that should be using the acpica headers is acpica itself15:54
mjg59There's defined exported interfaces for interacting with the acpica code15:55
Kanoyou are free to create a better 2.6.29 patch15:55
Kanoif you do that, no problem15:56
Kanowhat would be the include line for something that is in driver dir <acpi.. > does not seem to work16:05
mjg59There isn't one16:06
mjg59You can't #include stuff that's not in the exported API16:06
Kanowell ../drivers works ;)16:07
mjg59If you're inside the source tree, yes16:07
mjg59But that means you're doing something wrong16:07
Kanomjg59: it is not my fglrx patch, how about providing one?16:09
mjg59All I'm saying is that the code is horribly roken16:09
mjg59I'm not interested in rewriting stuff for a closed driver16:09
mjg59Oh, wow, this code is horrific16:16
mjg59It changes internal kernel state without any locking16:17
mjg59Utterly, utterly insane16:17
mjg59Kano: It can't be fixed without having the soure code to the binary component16:18
mjg59But it's also racy and likely to cause oopses under certain circumstanes16:19
Kanowell those parts are only the the wrapper16:22
mjg59So?16:23
Kanocouldnt you fix that part?16:24
mjg59No16:24
mjg59Not without modifying the closed part16:25
apwIntuitiveNipple, pushed the LBM packages for bug #337929, URL is in the bug16:54
ubot3Malone bug 337929 in linux-backports-modules-2.6.28 "ieee80211_regdom=EU now causes oops after latest update" [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/33792916:54
apwif you have a test bed, then it would be good if you can test16:54
rtgapw: I'd kind of like to see the patch too, can you attach it to the LP report?16:59
apwrtg its in the rookery link16:59
* maxb wonders if apw meant to publish udebs, not debs ?17:00
maxband empty udebs, at that17:00
IntuitiveNippleapw: I was just off out. I'll take a look later :)17:00
apwmaxb, no he did not.  arrg17:00
* apw goes hit the build system with larger hammers17:01
maxbhehe17:01
IntuitiveNipplewell that'll fix it for sure!17:01
apwrtg, does one need anything other than the headers as reported as build deps to build lbm?17:01
* maxb will fetch coffee and then build locally17:02
rtgapw: that patch is kind of a stop-gap measure, which will disappear when next LBM is updated. Can you bug folks on linux-wireless as well?17:02
apwmaxb, cool.  will try and resolve why my build are bust17:02
rtgapw: just the kernel headers17:02
apwrtg, sure this is just to get this tested by those with the issue17:02
apwif its works, i will propose a cleaner version upstream17:02
apwFATAL: Could not load /lib/modules/2.6.28-11-generic/modules.dep: No such file or directory17:03
apwi am getting those in the build ... yet the build doesn't complain17:03
apwdoes one need the kernel installed too?17:03
rtgapw: its just bitchy, but build anyway17:03
apwheh nice17:04
apwwho chose ^Q for blow my application away violently, and ^W for close this window and keep running17:05
IntuitiveNippleapw: I built lbm against just the headers17:06
apwdpkg-deb: --extract takes at most two arguments (.deb and directory)17:06
apwType dpkg-deb --help for help about manipulating *.deb files;17:06
apwType dpkg --help for help about installing and deinstalling packages.17:06
apwmake[1]: *** [do-binary-udebs] Error 217:06
apwmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/apw/local/git2/ubuntu-jaunty-lbm'17:06
apwmake: *** [binary-udebs] Error 217:06
apwdpkg-buildpackage: failure: fakeroot debian/rules binary gave error exit status 217:06
apw  dpkg -x $(ls ../linux-backports-modules-$i\_*i386.deb) \17:06
apwi _HATE_ debian packaging17:06
rtgapw: c;ean out the .debs in the directory above ubuntu-jaunty-lbm17:07
apwthats soooo annoying17:08
rtgapw: I'll fix it17:08
apwrtg you are a scolar ... pints++17:08
apwEOVERFLOW17:08
rtgapw: I've done it several times now, but evidently missed this one.17:09
apwwe have a large number of packages sadly17:09
apwand annoyingly i've fixed my kernels build to ship the branch into a nice clean empty build directory separated from all other build to avoid this ever happening17:09
apwbut the automation doesn't work for this thing17:10
apwyet anyhow17:10
IntuitiveNippleI've been setting up a cross-compiling distributed build server network. hopefully it'll cut build times down and increase the range I can work with.17:11
maxbIntuitiveNipple: fancy! What software are you using? I looked at buildd and cringed a bit17:12
apwi do something similar using a couple of bigger servers17:12
apwand my laptop can also be a client of itself17:13
IntuitiveNipplemaxb: distcc and gcc17:13
IntuitiveNippleWhat I'm trying to do is create a package to manage it all for deployment to EC217:13
maxbAh, compile farm, rather than package building network17:13
IntuitiveNipplemaxb: both17:13
IntuitiveNipplebut cross-compilation is the biggest hurdle to solve17:14
apwIntuitiveNipple, maxb, ok hopefully there are some actual .deb's at that URL now17:20
rtgapw: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-jaunty-lbm.git;a=commit;h=3988ab032ae12e86da8228945299bc4cd84f4f9517:24
apwrtg most excellent17:24
rtgapw: when did you last update from  the LBM repo? I pushed the current wireless-testing about 1.5 hours ago.17:25
apwahh crap about 2.5 hours ago17:25
apwthough the code in error was the same in upstream testing17:26
maxbFortunately I updated *my* lbm before I started my build :-)17:26
apwso i belive the issue is till there and the fix the same17:26
maxbrebooting with apw's patch now17:26
apwfingers crossed17:26
maxbapw: well.... wifi worked.... but I don't see your printk either17:34
apw?17:35
apwhrm17:35
apwyou got the appropriate option?17:35
apwor in-appropriate in this case17:35
maxbSo it's possible something unrelated in the latest wireless-testing/compat-wireless fixed the bug17:35
apwyep is possible17:35
apwmaxb, perhaps try the module i built which should have missed that update17:36
maxbI'll fetch your .deb *without* those changes and see if that helps, and build the latest without your patch17:36
apwmaxb, sound plan, thanks17:36
maxbah, yup, now I see your printk17:42
apwhrm.  so it may be fixed some other way now17:46
apwok will take that to look at17:46
maxbBuild of master-2009-03-24 for verification is in progress17:48
apwmaxb, thanks a lot17:56
* maxb gets the do-binary-udebs error you got, and says bad things about the buildsystem17:57
* apw hands maxb a hand full of rm17:58
rtgmaxb: buildsystem issues fixed and pushed17:59
maxbapw: Confirming bug gone (or at least, no longer reproducing) in unpatched ubuntu-jaunty-lbm.git, i.e. master-2009-03-2418:06
apwmaxb, thanks ... grumble... should have ignored it for longer18:07
apwrtg are we looking to have an lbm update shortly give you are updating it18:07
Kanortg: how about a patched drm radeon driver for 2.6.29?18:19
Kanoanything against that?18:19
yagohi all people. I would like ask if is it possible make a kernel write all in "ada"?21:30
tannewtcould someone enlighten me about the correlation between linux version numbers in ubuntu and the version numbers released on kernel.org?21:56
tannewtubuntu released version 2.6.27.7.11 before upstream released 2.6.27.721:56
johanbrthe ".7" in those two kernels have no relation to each other21:58
tannewtjohanbr: ah, that makes sense, shouldn't it be part of the package revision then?22:01
johanbrtannewt: no, the Ubuntu ".7" is increased whenever the ABI changes.22:03
tannewtjohanbr: based on patches?22:04
johanbryes22:04
tannewtjohanbr: okay, are there any packages the correspond more closely to upstream numbers?22:04
johanbrthere is a build service that builds packages of the upstream kernel22:05
johanbrif that's what you're looking for22:05
johanbrif you'd like to know which 2.6.27.X upstream kernel has been included in the ubuntu kernel, you'll have to read the changelog.22:06
tannewtjohanbr: ah, okay, I'm studying the mgiration of packages from upstream to downstream and like to assume version number correlations22:07
johanbrtannewt: alright. Keeping an eye on the ubuntu kernel mailing list can also be helpful.22:13
tannewtjohanbr: thanks for the tip but I'm automating it all, I'll just note it'll be wrong ;-D22:14
johanbroh :)22:14
tannewtjohanbr: pretty interesting stuff,  also have gripes about ubuntu version numbers that include the word "really" :-)22:17
johanbrtannewt: I think those are a trick to fool the build system.22:19
tannewtjohanbr: I believe that, a way of dealing with weird version numbers like I'm trying to deal with22:20
johanbrif a kernel is uploaded with too high a version number, I think the build machines won't accept a kernel with the correct (lower) version number, so that's why22:23
johanbror something like that22:23
tannewthmm, weird22:28
maxbtannewt: It's not really weird. Fundamentally, version numbers can't go backwards.23:34
maxbThe 'really' hack is just about the only way to accomplish that when an upstream version must be reverted.23:34
maxbI agree it's ugly though23:34
maxbDebian has epoch's for this purpose, but Ubuntu can't use them without sacrificing all possibility of automatedly syncing the package from Debian again in the future23:35

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!