[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Possible bug in qemu-kvm 0.12.3+dfsg-4~bpo50+1 with KSM



Thanks for the answers,
Just to reckap:
In 0.11.1 MADV_MERGEABLE is defined. Inside exec.c ?
In 0.12.3 is not defined.
Right?
Is there a way to fix this issue? Is also Squeze affected? In my opinion KSM is a really important feature not only for me.
Can i help in some way?

Regards
Christian

----- Original Message -----
From: martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org>
To: Faidon Liambotis <paravoid@debian.org>
Cc: backports-users@lists.backports.org <backports-users@lists.backports.org>; Grassi Christian (UGIS - UniCredit Group)
Sent: Sat Apr 17 20:08:36 2010
Subject: Re: Possible bug in qemu-kvm 0.12.3+dfsg-4~bpo50+1 with KSM

also sprach Faidon Liambotis <paravoid@debian.org> [2010.04.17.1913 +0200]:
> Last time around (backport of 0.11.1) I had to patch the source to
> define MADV_MERGEABLE explicitly since lenny's kernel headers obviously
> aren't defining it. I presume Martin didn't do that for 0.12.3?

I did not know about this, so no.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o>      Related projects:
: :'  :  proud Debian developer               http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck    http://vcs-pkg.org
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
"...the prevailing catholic odor - incense, wax, centuries of mild
 bleating from the lips of the flock."
                                -- thomas pynchon, gravity's rainbow

This e-mail is confidential and may also contain privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to read, print, save, process or disclose this message. If you have received this message by mistake, please inform the sender immediately and delete this e-mail, its attachments and any copies.
Any use, distribution, reproduction or disclosure by any person other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and the person responsible may incur penalties.
Thank you!

Reply to: