Bug#307317: marked as done (kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686: PREEMPT support)
Your message dated Mon, 2 May 2005 15:40:42 +0200
with message-id <20050502134042.GC19464@sputnik.stro.at>
and subject line Bug#307317: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686: PREEMPT support
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 2 May 2005 12:38:00 +0000
>From bonnaud@lis.inpg.fr Mon May 02 05:38:00 2005
Return-path: <bonnaud@lis.inpg.fr>
Received: from bal.lis.inpg.fr [195.220.21.15]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DSaBU-0005Vp-00; Mon, 02 May 2005 05:38:00 -0700
Received: from smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr (smtpc.lis.inpg.fr [195.220.21.17])
by bal.lis.inpg.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBE853067D5;
Mon, 2 May 2005 14:37:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD7C72C812A;
Mon, 2 May 2005 14:37:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtpc.lis.inpg.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 14198-07; Mon, 2 May 2005 14:37:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from irancy.lis.inpg.fr (irancy.lis.inpg.fr [195.220.21.167])
by smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr (Postfix) with SMTP id D16FB2C8101;
Mon, 2 May 2005 14:37:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by irancy.lis.inpg.fr (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 2 May 2005 14:37:24 +0200
From: "Laurent Bonnaud" <bonnaud@lis.inpg.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686: PREEMPT support
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.11
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 14:37:24 +0200
Message-Id: <[🔎] 20050502123724.D16FB2C8101@smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at lis.inpg.fr
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
Package: kernel
Version: 2.6.11-3
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
until version 2.6.10, kernels were built with PREEMPT enabled. This
has changed in version 2.6.11-2:
kernel-image-2.6.11-i386 (2.6.11-2) unstable; urgency=low
[...]
* Disable CONFIG_PREEMPT (Andres Salomon).
$ grep PREEMPT /boot/config-2.6.11-1-686
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
Since the changelog entry does not tell why this change was made, I'm
wondering. I'm running numerous machines with standard Debian kernels
and never found any problem with PREEMPT. So could you please:
- either re-enable PREEMPT
- or document why it has been disabled (in README.Debian for example) ?
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-1-686
Locale: LANG=fr_FR@euro, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Versions of packages kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686 depends on:
ii coreutils [fileutils] 5.2.1-2 The GNU core utilities
ii fileutils 5.2.1-2 The GNU file management utilities
ii initrd-tools 0.1.78 tools to create initrd image for p
ii module-init-tools 3.2-pre1-2 tools for managing Linux kernel mo
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 307317-done) by bugs.debian.org; 2 May 2005 13:40:39 +0000
>From max@stro.at Mon May 02 06:40:39 2005
Return-path: <max@stro.at>
Received: from baikonur.stro.at [213.239.196.228]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DSbA6-0005JB-00; Mon, 02 May 2005 06:40:39 -0700
Received: from sputnik (sputnik.itp.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.48.177])
by baikonur.stro.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id D44085C00B
for <307317-done@bugs.debian.org>; Mon, 2 May 2005 15:40:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from max by sputnik with local (Exim 4.50)
id 1DSbAA-00017i-S1
for 307317-done@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 02 May 2005 15:40:42 +0200
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:40:42 +0200
From: maximilian attems <debian@sternwelten.at>
To: 307317-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#307317: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-686: PREEMPT support
Message-ID: <20050502134042.GC19464@sputnik.stro.at>
References: <[🔎] 20050502123724.D16FB2C8101@smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20050502123724.D16FB2C8101@smtpc.lis.inpg.Fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
X-Virus-Scanned: by Amavis (ClamAV) at stro.at
Delivered-To: 307317-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
On Mon, 02 May 2005, Laurent Bonnaud wrote:
> until version 2.6.10, kernels were built with PREEMPT enabled. This
> has changed in version 2.6.11-2:
>
> kernel-image-2.6.11-i386 (2.6.11-2) unstable; urgency=low
> [...]
> * Disable CONFIG_PREEMPT (Andres Salomon).
>
> $ grep PREEMPT /boot/config-2.6.11-1-686
> # CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
>
> Since the changelog entry does not tell why this change was made, I'm
> wondering. I'm running numerous machines with standard Debian kernels
> and never found any problem with PREEMPT. So could you please:
>
> - either re-enable PREEMPT
> - or document why it has been disabled (in README.Debian for example) ?
>
>
if you are really interested why than you are welcome to search
for that option on kerneltrap.org and on the lkml archives.
the executive summary: it opens a can of hard debuggable worms.
if you want it for your shine new desktop than compile your own
kernel.
--
maks
Reply to: