=== bjf is now known as bjf[afk]
[00:20] <jjohansen> running errands, back on later
=== jjohansen is now known as jj-afk
=== bjf[afk] is now known as bjf
=== bjf changed the topic of #ubuntu-kernel to: Home: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/ || Maverick Kernel Version: 2.6.35 || Ubuntu Kernel Team Meeting - October-5 - 17:00 UTC || If you have a question just ask, and do wait around for an answer!
=== ivoks is now known as ivoks-afk
=== diwic is now known as diwic_afk
=== diwic_afk is now known as diwic
[07:25] <avinashhm> hi, is there any runtime way to find a physical addr corresponds to which virtual add,.... i mean ,any sysfs entry or something like that
=== smb` is now known as smb
=== smb is now known as smb`
=== smb` is now known as smb
[08:26]  * smb yawns
[08:28] <jj-afk> morning smb
[08:28] <smb> good night jj-afk :)
[08:28] <jj-afk> :)
[09:06] <smb> Morning cking. A little question to start the morning. Not really important but I wonder whether the new installer dialog for Ubuntu still offers some place to add a caching proxy. Not sure whether i just missed it but cannot remember to have seen it in Kubuntu or Ubuntu alternate install...
[09:08] <cking> smb, hrm, the installer has been simplified, and I did not see that option either
[09:08] <smb> I guess its the least of a common users problem...
[09:13]  * cking wonders if it's available on the alternate installer
[09:13]  * smb did not see it
[09:35] <smb> Nice, radeon-kms on my external monitor does not give me headaches in Maverick (ignoring the purpely background). One would hope this would be a simple change to be SRUed into Lucid...
=== diwic is now known as diwic_afk
[10:33] <Kano> hi, when will rc6 be ready?
[10:33] <Kano> also how about a special branch with aufs patch?
=== diwic_afk is now known as diwic
[10:39] <apw> Kano, as always a couple of hours, its in the queue
[10:39] <apw> Kano, so far there is no aufs2 for 2.6.36 based kernels
[10:40] <Kano> would be better when it would be mainline...
[10:40] <apw> its unlikely to be mainline ... it was rejected and the author and upstream not keen on compromise
[10:41] <Kano> and anything similar
=== diwic is now known as diwic_afk
[12:00] <Kano> apw: is 35.7 in the queue too
=== diwic_afk is now known as diwic
[12:10] <ara> JFo, morning mate
[12:10] <ara> JFo, do you have a minute?
[12:17] <diwic> every now and then, I bump into a problem where I find things like this in dmesg: "disagrees about version of symbol snd_ctl_add"
[12:18] <diwic> How do you trace such problems down?
=== cking is now known as cking-afk
[13:14] <JFo> ara, I do
[13:14] <JFo> provided you still need me
[13:14] <JFo> :)
[13:56] <ara> JFo, yes, I need
[13:57] <ara> you
[13:57] <JFo> I feel needed
[13:57] <JFo> :)
[13:57] <ara> JFo, davmor2 found a bug today with the Broadcom STA driver
[13:57] <ara> bug  https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/649357
[13:57] <JFo> ok
[13:57] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 649357 in network-manager (Ubuntu) "network-manager on une will not connect (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New]
[13:57]  * JFo opens the bug
[13:57] <ara> can you have a quick look to see if it could be a regression-potential on the kernel?
[13:58]  * smb wonders. Wasn't sta == bcmwl
[13:58] <ara> he's happy to add any other information you may need
[13:58] <JFo> ara, can do :)
[13:58]  * tgardner wonders. wasn't bcmwl an OEM problem?
[13:58] <smb> Well at least it might be a jockey problem
[13:59] <smb> I remember that you need to blacklist ssb and b44 to allow bcmwl to load
[13:59] <Kano> do you use 5.60.48.36?
[14:00] <JFo> Kano, I'm not sure what that number is in ref to?
[14:00] <JFo> smb, who do you think is appropriate to look at that bug?
[14:00] <Kano> well if you dont use the ubuntu package
[14:00] <JFo> someone who works on Jockey?
[14:00] <Kano> http://kanotix.com/files/fix/dkms/broadcom-wl-dkms.sh
[14:00] <Kano> that script installs it too
[14:01]  * smb would volunteer tgardner but that may retaliate to himself...
[14:01] <Kano> with dkms support and correct blacklisting
[14:01] <JFo> smb, heh
[14:01] <JFo> Kano, ah, now I see :)
[14:02] <Kano> but you may NOT use the default ubuntu package for it then
[14:02] <smb> JFo, I think first step would be whether it is a module load problem or something else
[14:02] <JFo> right
[14:02] <smb> JFo, And no I have not looked at the bug. :-P
[14:02] <JFo> heh
[14:03] <smb> JFo, Looking at it that is at least not the driver
[14:03] <JFo> ok
[14:03] <smb> As it seems to work when running normal destktop
[14:03] <JFo> yes
[14:05] <smb> JFo, Maybe asac can make a guess here
[14:09] <JFo> cool
[14:10] <JFo> I've asked him to take a look in #u-devel
[14:27] <JFo> odd bug 642792
[14:27] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 642792 in linux (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "ALT+PrtSc not recognised (affects: 4) (dups: 1) (heat: 412)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/642792
[14:28] <JFo> from comments "ALT+PrtSc+H I get the magic SysRq key help, so it looks like the kernel is trapping ALT+PrtSc."
[14:28] <JFo> wonder how that regression could happen
[14:28] <smb> JFo, That the kernel looks for that has always been the case
[14:29] <smb> It just was intercepted when running X to do a print screen
[14:29] <JFo> but it doesn't looks to be doing anything with it
[14:29] <JFo> ah
[14:29] <smb> JFo, The thing is that most keyboards have alt+ptrscr == sysreq
[14:30] <JFo> I see
[14:30] <JFo> and in this case it may not be?
[14:30] <JFo> or?
[14:30] <popey> my keyboard does indeed have alt+ptrscr == sysreq
[14:31] <JFo> hmm
[14:31] <smb> Or whatever used to intercept the keypress of alt+ptrscr before does not work for some reason
[14:31] <JFo> interesting
[14:31] <JFo> there are several bugs on this
[14:32] <JFo> wonder what could have changed
[14:32] <JFo> maybe X?
[14:32] <smb> JFo, Maybe loking at keyboard shortcuts helps
[14:33] <JFo> hmmm, my kbd uses Fn+PrtScrn for SysRq
[14:34] <smb> JFo, Funny, in Lucid even removing the shortcuts for PrtScr and alt+PrtScr does not stop gnome from doing it. Bah
[14:35] <JFo> heh
[14:41] <JFo> interesting way to discover the close channel key combo
[14:41] <JFo> smb, cyphermox is looking into the STA driver bug from earlier.
[14:42] <smb> Heh, something like please press ctrl-alt-del to continue in earlier days? :)
[14:42] <smb> JFo, Yeah saw that
[14:42] <JFo> not sure what it was. I was typing to you about the bug and apparently hit the right rune for it to close just this channel :)
[14:44]  * smb thinks of ctrl+w
[15:56] <ogasawara> JFo: I was actually looking at that bug 642792 yesterday
[15:56] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 642792 in linux (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "ALT+PrtSc not recognised (affects: 4) (dups: 1) (heat: 412)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/642792
[15:57] <JFo> ah :)
[15:57] <JFo> what do you think ogasawara?
[15:57] <JFo> look like something up the stack broken?
[15:57] <ogasawara> JFo: from what I can gather, it's expected behavior because sysrq handling is enabled by default in the kernel thus Alt+PrintScreen is interpreted as SysRq
[15:57] <JFo> ok
[15:58] <JFo> so no bug
[15:58] <JFo> cool
[15:58] <ogasawara> JFo: If we don't want that enabled by default, we should set "kernel.sysrq = 0" in /etc/sysctl.conf
[15:58] <JFo> want me to convey that to reporters?
[15:58] <ogasawara> JFo: I was going to write up a comment this morning to the bug, just haven't gotten to it yet
[15:58] <JFo> ok cool
[15:58] <JFo> if you like
[15:58] <ogasawara> popey: ^^
[15:58] <smb> ogasawara, The interesting part is that in Lucid the printscreen from gnome is chinming in even with it enabled
[15:58] <JFo> I will mimic you to the other bugs I find
[15:59] <popey> \o/
[15:59] <ogasawara> smb: I'm wondering if that's actually a bug in Lucid that it is capturing a screenshot when sysrq handling is enabled
[16:00] <popey> I am struggling to see how this isn't a regression bug. this has worked for years.
[16:00] <popey> and in system -> preferences -> keyboard shortcuts, it does indeed recognise ALT+PrScr in <Lucid.
[16:00] <ogasawara> popey: indeed, it's still expected behavior that Alt+PrintScreen will take a screenshot of the currently selected window by default
[16:00] <popey> well, <= Lucid.
[16:01] <popey> ok
[16:01] <smb> ogasawara, Initially I thought it would be ok when the shortcuts define this combination to be screenshot. The slightly annoying part is that i removed that definitions through the dialog and it still happens
[16:01] <ogasawara> popey: which is why I'd think we should disable SysRq handling by default to restore original behavior
[16:02] <popey> disabling via kernel.sysrq has the byproduct that the keyboard shortcut dialog doesn't say "Alt+PrSc" when you are defining the key, but "Alt+SysRq"
[16:02] <popey> which is odd
[16:02] <popey> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/55967124/Screenshot-Keyboard%20Shortcuts.png
[16:02] <popey> IIRC under Lucid it says Alt+Print, but I dont have any Lucid boxen to test on right this moment
[16:03] <smb> ogasawara, In Lucid it depends whether you are on the console or not. In X -> screenshot. On the console (text) the sysrq keys are active
[16:03] <smb> popey, It does (or did)
[16:05] <smb> ogasawara, Or in theory they are probably active both, but by the time you get to press something like alt+prtscr+s, you have several screenshot windows in your face
[16:06] <ogasawara> smb: was gonna ask if you still get screenshots even after pressing a key in combination with alt+prtscr, so it sounds like you do
[16:07] <smb> Let me try whether it does actually do it beside the many screenshots
[16:07] <smb> ogasawara, confirmed. It does both
[16:08] <ogasawara> smb: so that just seems odd and annoying to me
[16:09] <smb> ogasawara, So the bug that alt-prtscr does not do a screenshot is just that gnome does not do it. The kernel behaves as before. Well seems some feature compability with the other os. With keyboards having sysrq on fn+something it might be less confusing
[16:10] <smb> as long as something is not prtscr, that is
[16:11] <popey> thanks for looking at the bug ogasawara / JFo 
[16:11] <popey> (and smb) :D
[16:12] <JFo> no sweat popey
[16:12] <JFo> I think we had actually discussed the issue briefly before but got pulled into other things
[16:15] <hackeron> JFo: any luck? :)
[16:16] <JFo> hackeron, sadly no
[16:16] <JFo> smb, are you familiar with linux-crashdump?
[16:16] <smb> JFo, no, not really
[16:17] <JFo> me either
[16:17] <JFo> hackeron is having issues getting it to work
[16:17] <JFo> and I am not familiar enough to help
[16:17] <JFo> odd bug 647043
[16:17] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 647043 in linux (Ubuntu) "Unable to detect USB ports (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/647043
[16:17] <JFo> 2 USB issues in the same week
[16:17] <hackeron> JFo: did it not store the panic in /var/crash for you either?
[16:18] <JFo> hackeron, I never got round to changing that setting jj showed us yesterday
[16:18] <JFo> will try it now
[16:19] <hackeron> thanks :) - just to make sure it's not just my system
[16:20] <JFo> no sweat
[16:21] <JFo> looks like it is working for me hackeron 
[16:21] <JFo> I have 2 crashes in there now
[16:21] <hackeron> hmmm, is that with the setting jj showed yesterday or without?
[16:21] <hackeron> I have crashes there, just nothing related to linux-image
[16:21] <JFo> without
[16:21] <JFo> hmmm
[16:21] <JFo> one sec
[16:22] <hackeron> I have _usr_bin_landscape-sysinfo.0.crash - which is not to do with the kernel
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
=== ivoks-afk is now known as ivoks
[18:06] <ogasawara> vanhoof: bug 644237, did you have access to hw that could reproduce that warning?
[18:06] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 644237 in linux (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "WARNING: at /build/buildd/linux-2.6.35/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:1005 read_measured_perf_ctrs+0x78/0x90() (dup-of: 615153)" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/644237
[18:06] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 615153 in linux (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "WARNING: at /build/buildd/linux-maverick-2.6.35/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:1005 read_measured_perf_ctrs+0x6c/0x80() (affects: 29) (dups: 33) (heat: 276)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/615153
[18:06] <vanhoof> ogasawara: i do
[18:06] <vanhoof> ogasawara: Sarvatt has one in hand as well
[18:06] <Sarvatt> yeah
[18:07] <ogasawara> vanhoof, Sarvatt: cool, seems like there might be a patch upstream.  If I build you a test kernel with it applied, could you do some quick testing for me?
[18:07] <Sarvatt> yep! thanks for that ogasawara
[18:45] <jjohansen> ogasawara: do you remember if we opened a bug for the AA 0 day
[18:45] <ogasawara> jjohansen: yah, I added it to bug 647071 (see bottom of bug description)
[18:45] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 647071 in linux (Ubuntu Maverick) (and 1 other project) "0-day Maverick Kernel Upload (affects: 1) (heat: 12)" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/647071
[18:46] <jjohansen> ogasawara: thanks, I got the okay from jdstrand so I will post it to the list now
[18:46] <ogasawara> jjohansen: cool, thanks
[18:46] <jdstrand> yep, works great :)
[18:47] <jjohansen> ogasawara: should I open a separate bug as well?
[18:47] <ogasawara> jjohansen: nah, I'd just use 647071
[18:47] <jjohansen> okay
[18:53] <ogasawara> Sarvatt: when you time to get a chance to test - http://people.canonical.com/~ogasawara/lp644237/amd64/
[18:53] <JFo> ogasawara, she has sent the dmesg for that USB bug
[18:58] <ogasawara> JFo: hrm, it's not showing that any device was even detected.  don't suppose she could boot a Lucid LiveCD and confirm that the port isn't dead and attach dmesg from the working scenario.
[18:58] <JFo> k, will ask
[19:00] <ogasawara> JFo: is she in Millbank?
[19:00] <JFo> dunno
[19:00] <JFo> asking
[19:00] <ogasawara> JFo: as we'll have actual bodies in Millbank next week
[19:01] <JFo> yep
[19:01] <JFo> was thinking the same
[19:01] <JFo> she lives in CT
[19:01] <JFo> :-/
[19:07] <ogasawara> JFo: also just curious if she plugs the devices prior to booting are they then detected?
[19:07] <JFo> she is going to test that
[19:08]  * tgardner lunches
=== amitk is now known as amitk-afk
[19:10] <JFo> she's also going to test the windows she has installed dual-boot
[19:10] <JFo> see if it works there
[19:12] <JFo> ogasawara, windows has no issues with the USB
[19:12] <JFo> they work there
[19:53] <JFo> ogasawara, 
[19:53] <JFo> <lisas> BusyBox v1.15.3 (Ubuntu 1:1.15.3-1ubuntu4) built in shell (ash)
[19:53] <JFo> <lisas> Enter 'help' for a list oof built-in commands
[19:53] <JFo> <lisas> (initramfs) Unable to find a medium containing a live file system
[19:53] <JFo> * rickspencer3 has quit (Ex-Chat)
[19:53] <JFo> <lisas> jfo ^^^ this is what is showing on my screen now when trying to boot from USB
[19:55] <ogasawara> JFo: that's for Lucid?
[19:55] <ogasawara> JFo: or for Maverick?
[19:57] <ogasawara> JFo: I'd expect Lucid to work, Maverick not so much
[19:58] <ogasawara> JFo: I basically want to be able to compare the dmesg's from a working Lucid and a broken Maverick
[19:58] <JFo> Maverick
[19:59] <ogasawara> JFo: ok, so that seems expected
[19:59] <JFo> yeah, I have asked for Lucid
[19:59] <JFo> she'll have to d/l it
[19:59] <ogasawara> JFo: she's got some error messages in her Maverick dmesg with respect to usb that look suspect
[19:59] <JFo> ok
[20:00] <ogasawara> JFo: if you could walk her through testing the latest 2.6.36-rc6 mainline kernel too that'd be good
[20:00] <JFo> yeah, I asked her about that initially
[20:07] <scrllock> hmm, looks like xm shutdown times out with -rc6 as well
[20:09] <JFo> hackeron, I have yet to get my kernel to fail :-/
[20:10] <JFo> I suppose I should be happy
[20:49]  * ogasawara lunch
[21:45] <vanhoof> JFo: you want to panic your box? :)
[21:52] <tgardner> ogasawara, you doing anything on tangerine? I need to rebuild the maverick chroots
[21:53] <ogasawara> tgardner: go ahead, I'm inbetween test builds
[21:53] <tgardner> ogasawara, bouncing
[22:43] <JFo> ogasawara, her last to me today was that Lucid appeared to work fine on the LiveISO
[22:44] <ogasawara> JFo: ok thanks, will look at the logs in a bit
[22:44] <JFo> I'm fighting a massive headache, so I think I am going to call it for today. May check back in later
[22:44] <JFo> thanks ogasawara :)
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel