* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
@ 2006-01-09 12:45 ` CaT
2006-01-09 13:34 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 13:36 ` Kasper Sandberg
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: CaT @ 2006-01-09 12:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:03:46PM +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
Not necessarily a solution but have you thought of putting chvt in the
suspend/resume sequence? chvt to a terminal before suspending and chvt
to X after resume.
This was one of the things I used to do when I had BIOS suspend to disk
working (it was nice but then gateway *spit* decided to remove it in a
bios upgrade).
Still, the above might help you until you find someone to throw money
at. ;)
--
"To the extent that we overreact, we proffer the terrorists the
greatest tribute."
- High Court Judge Michael Kirby
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 12:45 ` CaT
@ 2006-01-09 13:34 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-10 13:29 ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-11 2:29 ` David Nicol
0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Yaroslav Rastrigin @ 2006-01-09 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: CaT; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
Hi,
On 9 January 2006 15:45, CaT wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:03:46PM +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> > Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
>
> Not necessarily a solution but have you thought of putting chvt in the
> suspend/resume sequence? chvt to a terminal before suspending and chvt
> to X after resume.
Yes, of course. I've spent countless hours trying to figure solution for this particular problem. Tried generic Linux suspend-to-disk and swsusp2,
changing terminals before/after suspend, delay sleeps, vbetool and all that fuss and jazz. Looks like race condition somewhere between kernel and X driver.
>
> Still, the above might help you until you find someone to throw money
> at. ;)
Ahhh. Sweet dream - to be able to offer money to fix extremely annoying bugs or to add missing features.
Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
>
--
Managing your Territory since the dawn of times ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 13:34 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
@ 2006-01-10 13:29 ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-10 16:29 ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-01-11 2:29 ` David Nicol
1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Helge Hafting @ 2006-01-10 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: CaT, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
>Ahhh. Sweet dream - to be able to offer money to fix extremely annoying bugs or to add missing features.
>Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
>
>
Depends on how much money you have to offer. If you have the resources
to hire
a programmer full-time until your favourite problem is solved - no
problem I think.
If funding development alone is a bit much, consider starting with one
particular problem and try collecting money from other interested
people.
Money can surely get the work done - but then you usually have to pay
enough that the programmer can make a living while working for you.
The cheap alternative is enthusiasts who will write a hardware driver if
they get
the hw for free.
Helge Hafting
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-10 13:29 ` Helge Hafting
@ 2006-01-10 16:29 ` Randy.Dunlap
0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Randy.Dunlap @ 2006-01-10 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helge Hafting
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, CaT, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
>
> >Ahhh. Sweet dream - to be able to offer money to fix extremely annoying bugs or to add missing features.
> >Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
> >
> >
> Depends on how much money you have to offer. If you have the resources
> to hire
> a programmer full-time until your favourite problem is solved - no
> problem I think.
Well, some docs would usually be very helpful. Reverse engineering
is usually too slow IMO.
> If funding development alone is a bit much, consider starting with one
> particular problem and try collecting money from other interested
> people.
>
> Money can surely get the work done - but then you usually have to pay
> enough that the programmer can make a living while working for you.
> The cheap alternative is enthusiasts who will write a hardware driver if
> they get
> the hw for free.
--
~Randy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 13:34 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-10 13:29 ` Helge Hafting
@ 2006-01-11 2:29 ` David Nicol
2006-01-11 2:56 ` Lee Revell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: David Nicol @ 2006-01-11 2:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: CaT, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
> Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
No? Bounties seems to work fine for Asterisk. Is the problem, still no central
linux kernel bounty system?
--
David L Nicol
high on complexity
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-11 2:29 ` David Nicol
@ 2006-01-11 2:56 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-12 18:53 ` David Nicol
0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-11 2:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Nicol
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, CaT, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:29 -0600, David Nicol wrote:
> On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
>
>
> No? Bounties seems to work fine for Asterisk. Is the problem, still no central
> linux kernel bounty system?
Many bounties don't work because they are too low, too vague or both.
For example several months ago Ubuntu offered $500 to "fix all remaining
ALSA issues for PowerMac hardware". HA! That's like 5 or 6 diffent
drivers which ranged from not working at all, to sound works but no
system beeps, etc...
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-11 2:56 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-12 18:53 ` David Nicol
2006-01-12 21:05 ` Lee Revell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: David Nicol @ 2006-01-12 18:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lee Revell
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, CaT, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On 1/10/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:29 -0600, David Nicol wrote:
> > On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
> >
> > > Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
> >
> >
> > No? Bounties seems to work fine for Asterisk. Is the problem, still no central
> > linux kernel bounty system?
>
>
> Many bounties don't work because they are too low, too vague or both.
> For example several months ago Ubuntu offered $500 to "fix all remaining
> ALSA issues for PowerMac hardware". HA! That's like 5 or 6 diffent
> drivers which ranged from not working at all, to sound works but no
> system beeps, etc...
>
> Lee
How did they offer this bounty? Through the ubuntu announcements channels?
Like if, say, Linux International was to partner with TipJar.com to create
and maintain an organized open bounty system where stakeholders wanting
to see something could contribute to the pot for the feature and the first
implementor who passes the tests (including code readability!) gets the pot.
Write me off-list to become involved in this project or to direct me to
an already existing project so I don't waste more time on wheel reinvention?
David "tipjar" Nicol
--
David L Nicol
awrsagfagoijneaghnjhda
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-12 18:53 ` David Nicol
@ 2006-01-12 21:05 ` Lee Revell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-12 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Nicol
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, CaT, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 12:53 -0600, David Nicol wrote:
> On 1/10/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 20:29 -0600, David Nicol wrote:
> > > On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Unfortunately, bounties doesn't work :-/
> > >
> > >
> > > No? Bounties seems to work fine for Asterisk. Is the problem, still no central
> > > linux kernel bounty system?
> >
> >
> > Many bounties don't work because they are too low, too vague or both.
> > For example several months ago Ubuntu offered $500 to "fix all remaining
> > ALSA issues for PowerMac hardware". HA! That's like 5 or 6 diffent
> > drivers which ranged from not working at all, to sound works but no
> > system beeps, etc...
> >
> > Lee
>
>
> How did they offer this bounty? Through the ubuntu announcements channels?
>
> Like if, say, Linux International was to partner with TipJar.com to create
> and maintain an organized open bounty system where stakeholders wanting
> to see something could contribute to the pot for the feature and the first
> implementor who passes the tests (including code readability!) gets the pot.
>
> Write me off-list to become involved in this project or to direct me to
> an already existing project so I don't waste more time on wheel reinvention?
Heh, I only found out about it when some Ubuntu user mentioned it in an
ALSA bug report. I guess they just expect people to find them somehow.
So yes, there needs to be a single, central resource for OSS bounties.
I think a lot of these problems with the PPC drivers were later solved.
But my point was really that $500 was not nearly enough for the amount
of work that would have been required. It's a nice bonus for someone
who would have done it for free anyway but I was under the impression
that bounties were created to solve problems too tricky or unrewarding
or uninteresting for someone to do for free.
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 12:45 ` CaT
@ 2006-01-09 13:36 ` Kasper Sandberg
2006-01-09 13:56 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 13:54 ` Lee Revell
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Kasper Sandberg @ 2006-01-09 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:03 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> Hi,
> > > > money to the right people.
> > >
> > > Could or would you be so kind to provide at least moderately complete
> > > pricelist ? Whom and how much should I pay to have correct support for
> > > intel graphics chipset, 2200BG Wi-Fi, complete
> > > suspend-to-disk/suspend-to-ram and to get an overall performance boost ?
> >
> > Since these are all supported in 2.6.15, $0 would be my quote.
> I've mentioned _correct_ support. Contrary to current rather sad state of things.
> 855GM still has no support for non-VESA videomodes (1280x800 can be enabled only via VBIOS hacks, and is not always properly restored on resume)
> (and don't supported with intelfb) (which, AFAIK, has no support for dualhead)
> 2200BG sometimes starts to unacceptably lag and drop packets after going out of suspend (either STR or STD) and until reboot.
> (And this is driver issue)
> Suspend to ram works, more or less, but drains power like hungry cat drinks milk, and I just can't leave my laptop in STR for more than two days
>
> without worrying about my on-the-road availability.
> Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
> Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand, why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
i can not take this seriously.. on both my laptop and workstation, the
kate window is up in less than a second after i either run kate from a
terminal, or select it in the kde menu..
unless ofcourse you are not using kde, and kate is the first kde
application you start, then it will need to load much more than simply
kate, at which point you cant really say what you are doing, since it
would be somewhat like comparing half of windows's startup time +
ultraedit startup time to kate startup time...
>
> So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay to solve abovementioned problems ?
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 13:36 ` Kasper Sandberg
@ 2006-01-09 13:56 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 16:07 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Yaroslav Rastrigin @ 2006-01-09 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kasper Sandberg; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
Hi, Kasper,
> > without worrying about my on-the-road availability.
> > Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
> > Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand, why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> > as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
> i can not take this seriously.. on both my laptop and workstation, the
> kate window is up in less than a second after i either run kate from a
> terminal, or select it in the kde menu..
Well, I could find more or less reasonable explanation of this behaviour - different VM policies of two OSes and
strangely strong and persistent belief "Free RAM is a wasted RAM" among kernel devs. Free RAM is not a wasted RAM, its a memory waiting to be used !
Whenever it is needed by apps I'm launching or working with.
>
> unless ofcourse you are not using kde, and kate is the first kde
> application you start, then it will need to load much more than simply
> kate, at which point you cant really say what you are doing, since it
> would be somewhat like comparing half of windows's startup time +
> ultraedit startup time to kate startup time...
No. Fully loaded KDE session (without kdesktop and kwin, since I don't use first and using my own WM instead of second).
So almost all necessary libraries are hot and loaded, and all what's missing is a dozen of Window's and Pixmap's to allocate and two threads to
handle events. And it takes seconds, not tens of a second, as in UltraEdit case
>
> >
> > So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay to solve abovementioned problems ?
> >
>
>
--
Managing your Territory since the dawn of times ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 13:56 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
@ 2006-01-09 16:07 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 19:24 ` Diego Calleja
0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2006-01-09 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin
Cc: Kasper Sandberg, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Llu, 2006-01-09 at 16:56 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> No. Fully loaded KDE session (without kdesktop and kwin, since I don't
> use first and using my own WM instead of second).
> So almost all necessary libraries are hot and loaded, and all what's
> missing is a dozen of Window's and Pixmap's to allocate and two
> threads to
> handle events. And it takes seconds, not tens of a second, as in
> UltraEdit case
Currently Linux performance loading large binaries is at least
perceptually worse than Windows (some of that is perceptual tricks
windows apps pull, some of it real). There is an openoffice.org related
analysis project currently under way to sort that out.
A second problem is the popularity of some very inefficiently written
desktops which badly need a good optimise, a diet and/or stuffing where
the sun doesn't shine. The kernel can only do so much of the work and
comparing xfce4 with gnome/kde shows that the kernel isn't the only
party involved in this....
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 16:07 ` Alan Cox
@ 2006-01-09 16:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:34 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:34 ` Olivier Galibert
2006-01-09 19:24 ` Diego Calleja
1 sibling, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-09 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, Kasper Sandberg, Alistair John Strachan,
andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 16:07 +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> Currently Linux performance loading large binaries is at least
> perceptually worse than Windows (some of that is perceptual tricks
> windows apps pull, some of it real).
Would you care to elaborate on this statement? It's not clear to me how
perception could differ from reality in this case. If it seems faster
doesn't that mean it is faster?
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 16:15 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-09 16:34 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:34 ` Olivier Galibert
1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2006-01-09 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lee Revell
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, Kasper Sandberg, Alistair John Strachan,
andersen, linux-kernel
On Llu, 2006-01-09 at 11:15 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> Would you care to elaborate on this statement? It's not clear to me how
> perception could differ from reality in this case. If it seems faster
> doesn't that mean it is faster?
Depends who is measuring and what is being measured.
If you want to understand how to make the kernel faster you care about
real speed changes. Application authors may well want to look at
perceptual tricks (like splash screens, opening windows early before you
have the code even loaded to do much else etc)
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 16:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 16:34 ` Alan Cox
@ 2006-01-09 16:34 ` Olivier Galibert
1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Olivier Galibert @ 2006-01-09 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lee Revell
Cc: Alan Cox, Yaroslav Rastrigin, Kasper Sandberg,
Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 11:15:12AM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 16:07 +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Currently Linux performance loading large binaries is at least
> > perceptually worse than Windows (some of that is perceptual tricks
> > windows apps pull, some of it real).
>
> Would you care to elaborate on this statement? It's not clear to me how
> perception could differ from reality in this case. If it seems faster
> doesn't that mean it is faster?
You can have a window opened without being ready to accept input yet
for instance. XEmacs does that[1] when it opens its window before
parsing the user's configuration which can load a number of things and
hence take a while to run. "Ok I'm going to open your application"
animations allow to win some perceptual time too.
Humans are fundamentally easy to fool for 1-2 seconds as long as they
have feedback. Longer gets harder :-)
OG.
[1] For technical reasons, not perceptual.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 16:07 ` Alan Cox
2006-01-09 16:15 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-09 19:24 ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-09 19:33 ` Lee Revell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Diego Calleja @ 2006-01-09 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: yarick, lkml, s0348365, andersen, linux-kernel
El Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:07:07 +0000,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> escribió:
> Currently Linux performance loading large binaries is at least
> perceptually worse than Windows (some of that is perceptual tricks
> windows apps pull, some of it real). There is an openoffice.org related
> analysis project currently under way to sort that out.
Desktop performance has become a such hot topic that I wonder if
it would be worth to setup a dedicated mailing list somewhere
where all the parts involved (kernel, kde/gnome, x.org, libc) can
analyze what are the real problems are.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 19:24 ` Diego Calleja
@ 2006-01-09 19:33 ` Lee Revell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-09 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Diego Calleja; +Cc: Alan Cox, yarick, lkml, s0348365, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:24 +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Mon, 09 Jan 2006 16:07:07 +0000,
> Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> escribió:
>
> > Currently Linux performance loading large binaries is at least
> > perceptually worse than Windows (some of that is perceptual tricks
> > windows apps pull, some of it real). There is an openoffice.org related
> > analysis project currently under way to sort that out.
>
> Desktop performance has become a such hot topic that I wonder if
> it would be worth to setup a dedicated mailing list somewhere
> where all the parts involved (kernel, kde/gnome, x.org, libc) can
> analyze what are the real problems are.
There already is one:
http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2005-December/thread.html#522
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 12:45 ` CaT
2006-01-09 13:36 ` Kasper Sandberg
@ 2006-01-09 13:54 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 14:51 ` [OT?] " Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 14:32 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-09 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:03 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> Hi,
> > > > money to the right people.
> > >
> > > Could or would you be so kind to provide at least moderately complete
> > > pricelist ? Whom and how much should I pay to have correct support for
> > > intel graphics chipset, 2200BG Wi-Fi, complete
> > > suspend-to-disk/suspend-to-ram and to get an overall performance boost ?
> >
> > Since these are all supported in 2.6.15, $0 would be my quote.
> I've mentioned _correct_ support. Contrary to current rather sad state of things.
> 855GM still has no support for non-VESA videomodes (1280x800 can be enabled only via VBIOS hacks, and is not always properly restored on resume)
> (and don't supported with intelfb) (which, AFAIK, has no support for dualhead)
> 2200BG sometimes starts to unacceptably lag and drop packets after going out of suspend (either STR or STD) and until reboot.
> (And this is driver issue)
> Suspend to ram works, more or less, but drains power like hungry cat drinks milk, and I just can't leave my laptop in STR for more than two days
> without worrying about my on-the-road availability.
> Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
> Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand, why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
>
> So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay to solve abovementioned problems ?
>
Where are the bug reports? You didn't expect these to just fix
themselves did you?
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* [OT?] Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 13:54 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-09 14:51 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 15:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 15:17 ` Pekka Enberg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Yaroslav Rastrigin @ 2006-01-09 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lee Revell; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
Hi, Lee,
On 9 January 2006 16:54, you wrote:
> >
>
> Where are the bug reports? You didn't expect these to just fix
> themselves did you?
Been there, done that. Bugreport about malfunctioning (due to ACPI) 3c556 in IBM ThinkPad T20 was looked at once in a few months without any progress,
and I've finally lost track of it after changing hardware. In more than a year this problem wasn't solved, so I'm assuming bugreports aren't so effective.
2200BG ping and packet loss problem was reported in ipw2200-devel mailing list recently (by another user), and the only answer was
"Switch to version 1.0.0" (which is tooo old and missing needed features and bugfixes, so recommentation was unacceptable). So I'm assuming addressing
developers directly is not too effective either.
Two other options I see are to debug/fix it by myself and try to stimulate others monetarily. First option isn't really affordable for me ,
so I'm trying to research second.
--
Managing your Territory since the dawn of times ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT?] Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 14:51 ` [OT?] " Yaroslav Rastrigin
@ 2006-01-09 15:15 ` Lee Revell
2006-01-09 15:36 ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-01-09 15:17 ` Pekka Enberg
1 sibling, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Lee Revell @ 2006-01-09 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 17:51 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> Hi, Lee,
> On 9 January 2006 16:54, you wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Where are the bug reports? You didn't expect these to just fix
> > themselves did you?
> Been there, done that. Bugreport about malfunctioning (due to ACPI) 3c556 in IBM ThinkPad T20 was looked at once in a few months without any progress,
> and I've finally lost track of it after changing hardware. In more than a year this problem wasn't solved, so I'm assuming bugreports aren't so effective.
> 2200BG ping and packet loss problem was reported in ipw2200-devel mailing list recently (by another user), and the only answer was
> "Switch to version 1.0.0" (which is tooo old and missing needed features and bugfixes, so recommentation was unacceptable). So I'm assuming addressing
> developers directly is not too effective either.
> Two other options I see are to debug/fix it by myself and try to stimulate others monetarily. First option isn't really affordable for me ,
> so I'm trying to research second.
Bug reports certainly are effective, but if no one else can reproduce
your problem then obviously it can't be fixed.
A bug report that gets no responses is a good sign that you need to
provide more information or work a little harder to debug it yourself.
Lee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT?] Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 15:15 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-09 15:36 ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-01-14 9:55 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 45+ messages in thread
From: Randy.Dunlap @ 2006-01-09 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lee Revell
Cc: Yaroslav Rastrigin, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 17:51 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> > Hi, Lee,
> > On 9 January 2006 16:54, you wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Where are the bug reports? You didn't expect these to just fix
> > > themselves did you?
> > Been there, done that. Bugreport about malfunctioning (due to ACPI) 3c556 in IBM ThinkPad T20 was looked at once in a few months without any progress,
> > and I've finally lost track of it after changing hardware. In more than a year this problem wasn't solved, so I'm assuming bugreports aren't so effective.
> > 2200BG ping and packet loss problem was reported in ipw2200-devel mailing list recently (by another user), and the only answer was
> > "Switch to version 1.0.0" (which is tooo old and missing needed features and bugfixes, so recommentation was unacceptable). So I'm assuming addressing
> > developers directly is not too effective either.
> > Two other options I see are to debug/fix it by myself and try to stimulate others monetarily. First option isn't really affordable for me ,
> > so I'm trying to research second.
>
> Bug reports certainly are effective, but if no one else can reproduce
> your problem then obviously it can't be fixed.
That's not a good attitude IMO. I'd bet that Linus and Andrew have fixed
lots of bugs that they couldn't reproduce.
> A bug report that gets no responses is a good sign that you need to
> provide more information or work a little harder to debug it yourself.
--
~Randy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT?] Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 15:36 ` Randy.Dunlap
@ 2006-01-14 9:55 ` Pavel Machek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-01-14 9:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Randy.Dunlap
Cc: Lee Revell, Yaroslav Rastrigin, Alistair John Strachan, andersen,
linux-kernel
On Mon 09-01-06 07:36:37, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Lee Revell wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 17:51 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> > > Hi, Lee,
> > > On 9 January 2006 16:54, you wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Where are the bug reports? You didn't expect these to just fix
> > > > themselves did you?
> > > Been there, done that. Bugreport about malfunctioning (due to ACPI) 3c556 in IBM ThinkPad T20 was looked at once in a few months without any progress,
> > > and I've finally lost track of it after changing hardware. In more than a year this problem wasn't solved, so I'm assuming bugreports aren't so effective.
> > > 2200BG ping and packet loss problem was reported in ipw2200-devel mailing list recently (by another user), and the only answer was
> > > "Switch to version 1.0.0" (which is tooo old and missing needed features and bugfixes, so recommentation was unacceptable). So I'm assuming addressing
> > > developers directly is not too effective either.
> > > Two other options I see are to debug/fix it by myself and try to stimulate others monetarily. First option isn't really affordable for me ,
> > > so I'm trying to research second.
> >
> > Bug reports certainly are effective, but if no one else can reproduce
> > your problem then obviously it can't be fixed.
>
> That's not a good attitude IMO. I'd bet that Linus and Andrew have fixed
> lots of bugs that they couldn't reproduce.
It makes sense for not-yet-mature stuff like ipw....
--
Thanks, Sharp!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: [OT?] Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 14:51 ` [OT?] " Yaroslav Rastrigin
2006-01-09 15:15 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-09 15:17 ` Pekka Enberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Pekka Enberg @ 2006-01-09 15:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin
Cc: Lee Revell, Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
Hi,
On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
> Been there, done that. Bugreport about malfunctioning (due to ACPI)
> 3c556 in IBM ThinkPad T20 was looked at once in a few months
> without any progress, and I've finally lost track of it after changing
> hardware. In more than a year this problem wasn't solved, so I'm
> assuming bugreports aren't so effective.
Unfortunately bug reports are sometimes lost in the noise. How many
times did you resend the bug report? Did you report all the required
information? Were you able to isolate the failing subsystem? Was there
a working kernel version? Did you try to isolate the changeset that
introduced the bug? Sometimes you have to complain many times and do a
bit of investigative work yourself. There are plenty of bug reports on
LKML which are being ignored because the original reported fails to
follow up on the problem.
On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
> 2200BG ping and packet loss problem was reported in ipw2200-devel
> mailing list recently (by another user), and the only answer was
> "Switch to version 1.0.0" (which is tooo old and missing needed features
> and bugfixes, so recommentation was unacceptable). So I'm assuming
> addressing developers directly is not too effective either.
IPW2200 hardware documentation is closed which narrows down the amount
of people who can help you out, sorry. Perhaps you could complain to
your vendor?
Pekka
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2006-01-09 13:54 ` Lee Revell
@ 2006-01-09 14:32 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-09 15:22 ` Denis Vlasenko
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Bernd Petrovitsch @ 2006-01-09 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 14:03 +0300, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> Hi,
> > > > money to the right people.
> > >
> > > Could or would you be so kind to provide at least moderately complete
> > > pricelist ? Whom and how much should I pay to have correct support for
> > > intel graphics chipset, 2200BG Wi-Fi, complete
> > > suspend-to-disk/suspend-to-ram and to get an overall performance boost ?
> >
> > Since these are all supported in 2.6.15, $0 would be my quote.
> I've mentioned _correct_ support. Contrary to current rather sad state of things.
> 855GM still has no support for non-VESA videomodes (1280x800 can be enabled only via VBIOS hacks, and is not always properly restored on resume)
> (and don't supported with intelfb) (which, AFAIK, has no support for dualhead)
> 2200BG sometimes starts to unacceptably lag and drop packets after going out of suspend (either STR or STD) and until reboot.
> (And this is driver issue)
> Suspend to ram works, more or less, but drains power like hungry cat drinks milk, and I just can't leave my laptop in STR for more than two days
> without worrying about my on-the-road availability.
> Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
> Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand, why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
>
> So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay to solve abovementioned problems ?
The best place to ask this question is IMHO the respective development
lists and/or maintainers. If both of this does not exist, find recent
patch submitters (who provided patches for more than whitespace and
similar cleanups) and ask them.
Bernd
--
Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
Embedded Linux Development and Services
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2006-01-09 14:32 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
@ 2006-01-09 15:22 ` Denis Vlasenko
2006-01-09 19:07 ` Diego Calleja
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Denis Vlasenko @ 2006-01-09 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On Monday 09 January 2006 13:03, Yaroslav Rastrigin wrote:
> Hi,
> > > > money to the right people.
> > >
> > > Could or would you be so kind to provide at least moderately complete
> > > pricelist ? Whom and how much should I pay to have correct support for
> > > intel graphics chipset, 2200BG Wi-Fi, complete
> > > suspend-to-disk/suspend-to-ram and to get an overall performance boost ?
> >
> > Since these are all supported in 2.6.15, $0 would be my quote.
>
> I've mentioned _correct_ support. Contrary to current rather sad state of things.
> 855GM still has no support for non-VESA videomodes (1280x800 can be enabled
> only via VBIOS hacks, and is not always properly restored on resume)
> (and don't supported with intelfb) (which, AFAIK, has no support for dualhead)
> 2200BG sometimes starts to unacceptably lag and drop packets after going out
> of suspend (either STR or STD) and until reboot.
> (And this is driver issue)
> Suspend to ram works, more or less, but drains power like hungry cat drinks milk,
> and I just can't leave my laptop in STR for more than two days
> without worrying about my on-the-road availability.
> Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session,
> since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
> Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand,
> why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
stracing kate with -t, -tt, -ttt and/or -T options may help. man strace.
(Do you have such tool in Windows?)
> So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay
> to solve abovementioned problems?
Maybe RedHat, or Suse, or some other commercial distro.
--
vda
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2006-01-09 15:22 ` Denis Vlasenko
@ 2006-01-09 19:07 ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-09 22:49 ` Dave Airlie
2006-01-10 12:00 ` Pavel Machek
7 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Diego Calleja @ 2006-01-09 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: s0348365, andersen, linux-kernel
El Mon, 9 Jan 2006 14:03:46 +0300,
Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> escribió:
> Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand, why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
>
> So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay to solve abovementioned problems ?
X.org and related freedesktop projects would be a good start. There's
a _lot_ of things that need to be done for X.org and nobody is doing
them, and they benefit all the desktops not just KDE. Fontconfig eats
1/3 of the time it takes to start a kde app (with warm caches), for
example.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2006-01-09 19:07 ` Diego Calleja
@ 2006-01-09 22:49 ` Dave Airlie
2006-01-10 12:00 ` Pavel Machek
7 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Dave Airlie @ 2006-01-09 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
On 1/9/06, Yaroslav Rastrigin <yarick@it-territory.ru> wrote:
> Hi,
> > > > money to the right people.
> > >
> > > Could or would you be so kind to provide at least moderately complete
> > > pricelist ? Whom and how much should I pay to have correct support for
> > > intel graphics chipset, 2200BG Wi-Fi, complete
> > > suspend-to-disk/suspend-to-ram and to get an overall performance boost ?
> >
> > Since these are all supported in 2.6.15, $0 would be my quote.
> I've mentioned _correct_ support. Contrary to current rather sad state of things.
> 855GM still has no support for non-VESA videomodes (1280x800 can be enabled only via VBIOS hacks, and is not always properly restored on resume)
> (and don't supported with intelfb) (which, AFAIK, has no support for dualhead)
This can be fixed with money, send me lots of it and I'd swear I'd fix
it, however I'm lacking the other thing which is time, I'm nearly sure
I've gotten enough information to start working on some basic
modesetting for some of the external parts for these chips, however
TMDS controllers for laptop screen is probably the one area which is
going to be more difficult and at that stage it usually involves
cracking open the laptop and looking inside, or doing some "looking"
at the BIOS.
The thing is Intel could do this work as well, but they probably don't
want to release source code to drive other vendors chips (the external
chips are never from Intel) as they may not have the proper NDAs in
place, however a company like Intel could also just bully the smaller
vendors into supplying them with such NDAs, and pull the finger out.
Also the fact that the OEMs just put whatever chip onto the board they
can, and fix the Win32 drivers to use them, means Intel don't know in
a lot of cases what has been stuck to the end of the i855 chipset to
drive the internal flat panel or DVI connectors.
Dave.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread* Re: Why the DOS has many ntfs read and write driver,but the linux can't for a long time
2006-01-09 11:03 ` Yaroslav Rastrigin
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2006-01-09 22:49 ` Dave Airlie
@ 2006-01-10 12:00 ` Pavel Machek
7 siblings, 0 replies; 45+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Machek @ 2006-01-10 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaroslav Rastrigin; +Cc: Alistair John Strachan, andersen, linux-kernel
Hi!
> > > > money to the right people.
> > >
> > > Could or would you be so kind to provide at least moderately complete
> > > pricelist ? Whom and how much should I pay to have correct support for
> > > intel graphics chipset, 2200BG Wi-Fi, complete
> > > suspend-to-disk/suspend-to-ram and to get an overall performance boost ?
> >
> > Since these are all supported in 2.6.15, $0 would be my quote.
> I've mentioned _correct_ support. Contrary to current rather sad state of things.
> 855GM still has no support for non-VESA videomodes (1280x800 can be enabled only via VBIOS hacks, and is not always properly restored on resume)
> (and don't supported with intelfb) (which, AFAIK, has no support for dualhead)
> 2200BG sometimes starts to unacceptably lag and drop packets after going out of suspend (either STR or STD) and until reboot.
> (And this is driver issue)
> Suspend to ram works, more or less, but drains power like hungry cat drinks milk, and I just can't leave my laptop in STR for more than two days
> without worrying about my on-the-road availability.
> Suspend to disk has nasty tendency to ruin my whole hot live X session, since X can't properly restore VT on resume.
> Overall performance isn't that bad, either, but I just can't understand, why KATE (Kde more or less advanced editor) takes twice as long to start
> as UltraEdit in _emulated_ (VMWare) Windows XP running on this same box.
>
> So, the question remains the same - whom and how much I need to pay to solve abovementioned problems ?
Buy SLES with support contract. We should be able to help with
s-t-disk and ipw2200... 2 days in s-t-ram sounds quite ok, why
do you think anytink is wrong there?
Pavel
--
Thanks, Sharp!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 45+ messages in thread