From jbeulich@novell.com Tue Jan 8 10:54:20 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 10:54:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m08IsIgw003040 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:54:20 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199818470-1e8f01e60000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 49A34C28E11 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:54:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com (public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com [195.33.99.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id UklSIXMGYOOahKE8 for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 10:54:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from EMEA1-MTA by public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:37:43 +0000 Message-Id: <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.2 HP Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:38:03 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Christoph Hellwig" , "Andrew Morton" Cc: , , , , X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline X-Barracuda-Connect: public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com[195.33.99.129] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199818475 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38959 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by oss.sgi.com id m08IsIgw003040 X-archive-position: 872 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: jbeulich@novell.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg >>> Andrew Morton 25.12.07 23:05 >>> >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 +0000 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint >> > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that >> > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves >> > directly into core files. >> >> I agree that we probably want something like this. As do some others, >> so we already had a few a few attempts at similar things. The first one >> is from SGI and called PAGG (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/) and also >> includes allocating per-task data for it's users. Then also from SGI >> there has been a simplified version called pnotify that's also available >> from the website above. >> >> Later Matt Helsley had something called "Task Watchers" which lwn has >> an article on: http://lwn.net/Articles/208117/. >> >> For some reason neither ever made a lot of progess (performance >> problems?). >> > >I had it in -mm, sorted out all the problems but ended up not pulling the >trigger. > >Problem is, it adds runtime overhead purely for the convenience of kernel >programmers, and I don't think that's a good tradeoff. > >Sprinkling direct calls into a few well-known sites won't kill us, and >we've survived this long. Why not keep doing that, and save everyone a few >cycles? Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch disagree), I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code isn't allowed into the kernel I think it is not unreasonable to at least expect the kernel to provide some fundamental infrastructure that can be used for those (supposedly unacceptable) bits. All I did here was utilizing the base infrastructure I want added to clean up code that appeared pretty ad-hoc. Jan From akpm@linux-foundation.org Tue Jan 8 14:25:52 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:25:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m08MPodU023469 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:25:52 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199831161-1f1403960000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 2D5E0C30C21; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:26:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org (smtp2.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.14]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id FXYjypRsirR7rUBH; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:26:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.55]) by smtp2.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id m08MEQKB002202 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:14:32 -0800 Received: from akpm.corp.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with SMTP id m08MEO7j001889; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:14:25 -0800 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:14:24 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: "Jan Beulich" Cc: hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Message-Id: <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MIMEDefang-Filter: lf$Revision: 1.188 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.14 X-Barracuda-Connect: smtp2.linux-foundation.org[207.189.120.14] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199831167 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38973 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 873 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: akpm@linux-foundation.org Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:38:03 +0000 "Jan Beulich" wrote: > >>> Andrew Morton 25.12.07 23:05 >>> > >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 +0000 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > >> > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > >> > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves > >> > directly into core files. > >> > >> I agree that we probably want something like this. As do some others, > >> so we already had a few a few attempts at similar things. The first one > >> is from SGI and called PAGG (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/) and also > >> includes allocating per-task data for it's users. Then also from SGI > >> there has been a simplified version called pnotify that's also available > >> from the website above. > >> > >> Later Matt Helsley had something called "Task Watchers" which lwn has > >> an article on: http://lwn.net/Articles/208117/. > >> > >> For some reason neither ever made a lot of progess (performance > >> problems?). > >> > > > >I had it in -mm, sorted out all the problems but ended up not pulling the > >trigger. > > > >Problem is, it adds runtime overhead purely for the convenience of kernel > >programmers, and I don't think that's a good tradeoff. > > > >Sprinkling direct calls into a few well-known sites won't kill us, and > >we've survived this long. Why not keep doing that, and save everyone a few > >cycles? > > Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other > people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch disagree), > I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm > sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code isn't allowed into the kernel > I think it is not unreasonable to at least expect the kernel to provide some > fundamental infrastructure that can be used for those (supposedly > unacceptable) bits. All I did here was utilizing the base infrastructure I want > added to clean up code that appeared pretty ad-hoc. > Ah. That's a brand new requirement. The requirement which I thought we were addressing was "clean the code up by adding a notifier chain so multiple subsystems don't need to patch in hard-coded calls". My contention is that the code clarity which this gains isn't worth the runtime cost. Now we have a new requirement: "allow out-of-tree code to hook into these spots without needing to patch those few callsites". I think we'd need a pretty detailed description of the pain which this would relieve before we would take such an extraordinary step. What are those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? Patching calls into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? From pj@sgi.com Tue Jan 8 16:03:16 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:03:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0902rOW029631 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:03:15 -0800 Received: from sgi.com (mtv-vpn-hw-masa-1.corp.sgi.com [134.15.25.210]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m09038gZ008693; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:03:08 -0800 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:03:09 -0600 From: Paul Jackson To: Andrew Morton Cc: jbeulich@novell.com, hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Message-Id: <20080108180309.4ccab28d.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.12.0; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-archive-position: 874 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: pj@sgi.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg Andrew wrote: > What are those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? > Patching calls into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? Most likely. I suspect we have general agreement and awareness that such patching is not something that sells well in Linux-land. And for good reason in my personal view ... such patching by loadable modules could open the door to compromising the integrity of Linux in ways that could be dangerous. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.940.382.4214 From akpm@linux-foundation.org Tue Jan 8 16:31:27 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:31:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m090VPr5003046 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:31:26 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199838699-017401880000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id CA179C31B78; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:31:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org (smtp2.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.14]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id pOmjUWyASjL1uEbs; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:31:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.55]) by smtp2.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id m090VLdY009812 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:31:22 -0800 Received: from akpm.corp.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with SMTP id m090VK4w007728; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:31:20 -0800 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:31:20 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Paul Jackson Cc: jbeulich@novell.com, hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Message-Id: <20080108163120.e1b42c30.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080108180309.4ccab28d.pj@sgi.com> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080108180309.4ccab28d.pj@sgi.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MIMEDefang-Filter: lf$Revision: 1.188 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.14 X-Barracuda-Connect: smtp2.linux-foundation.org[207.189.120.14] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199838701 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38981 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 875 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: akpm@linux-foundation.org Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:03:09 -0600 Paul Jackson wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > What are those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? > > Patching calls into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? > > Most likely. I suspect we have general agreement and awareness > that such patching is not something that sells well in Linux-land. > And for good reason in my personal view ... such patching by loadable > modules could open the door to compromising the integrity of Linux in > ways that could be dangerous. > err, no. What I meant was that the providers of these mystery features are presumably also patching into fork.c/exec.c/exit.c at the source code level so as to enable the mystery features within their overall kernel package. If so, this doesn't sounds terribly onerous. From matthltc@us.ibm.com Tue Jan 8 18:46:51 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m092ko3M010695 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:46:50 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199846824-481f02370000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D97F8C324D3 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (e34.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.152]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id wV6fzUeIDYq3lLCN for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m092l3A3020859 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 21:47:03 -0500 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m092l3pu132814 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:47:03 -0700 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m092l286004403 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:47:03 -0700 Received: from dyn9047017068.beaverton.ibm.com (dyn9047017068.beaverton.ibm.com [9.47.17.68]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m092l1Vk004347; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:47:01 -0700 X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier From: Matt Helsley To: Andrew Morton Cc: Jan Beulich , hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:00 -0800 Message-Id: <1199846820.17010.166.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Barracuda-Connect: e34.co.us.ibm.com[32.97.110.152] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199846826 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38991 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 876 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: matthltc@us.ibm.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 14:14 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:38:03 +0000 > "Jan Beulich" wrote: > > > >>> Andrew Morton 25.12.07 23:05 >>> > > >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:26:21 +0000 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > > >> > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > >> > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > > >> > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves > > >> > directly into core files. > > >> > > >> I agree that we probably want something like this. As do some others, > > >> so we already had a few a few attempts at similar things. The first one > > >> is from SGI and called PAGG (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/) and also > > >> includes allocating per-task data for it's users. Then also from SGI > > >> there has been a simplified version called pnotify that's also available > > >> from the website above. > > >> > > >> Later Matt Helsley had something called "Task Watchers" which lwn has > > >> an article on: http://lwn.net/Articles/208117/. > > >> > > >> For some reason neither ever made a lot of progess (performance > > >> problems?). > > >> > > > > > >I had it in -mm, sorted out all the problems but ended up not pulling the > > >trigger. > > > > > >Problem is, it adds runtime overhead purely for the convenience of kernel > > >programmers, and I don't think that's a good tradeoff. > > > > > >Sprinkling direct calls into a few well-known sites won't kill us, and > > >we've survived this long. Why not keep doing that, and save everyone a few > > >cycles? > > > > Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other > > people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch disagree), > > I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm > > sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code isn't allowed into the kernel > > I think it is not unreasonable to at least expect the kernel to provide some > > fundamental infrastructure that can be used for those (supposedly > > unacceptable) bits. All I did here was utilizing the base infrastructure I want > > added to clean up code that appeared pretty ad-hoc. > > > > Ah. That's a brand new requirement. In all fairness it's not really a brand new requirement -- just one that wasn't strongly emphasized during prior attempts to get something like this in. I had a mostly-working patch for this on top of the Task Watchers v2 patch set. I never posted that specific patch because it had a race with module unloading and the fix only increased the overhead you were unhappy with. I mentioned it briefly in my lengthy [PATCH 0/X] description for Task Watchers v2 (http://lwn.net/Articles/207873/): "TODO: ... I'm working on three more patches that add support for creating a task watcher from within a module using an ELF section. They haven't recieved as much attention since I've been focusing on measuring the performance impact of these patches." Would tainting the kernel upon registration of out-of-tree "notifiers" be more acceptable? Cheers, -Matt Helsley From akpm@linux-foundation.org Tue Jan 8 19:21:50 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:21:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m093LnLk012779 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:21:50 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199848923-0f6100fa0000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 3A2A44FB308; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org (smtp2.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.14]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id apCft70e0IpsxEgd; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:22:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [207.189.120.55]) by smtp2.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id m093Lmbl017204 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:21:49 -0800 Received: from box (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with SMTP id m093LllM014071; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:21:47 -0800 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:22:07 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Matt Helsley Cc: Jan Beulich , hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Message-Id: <20080108192207.4646e574.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1199846820.17010.166.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1199846820.17010.166.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MIMEDefang-Filter: lf$Revision: 1.188 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.53 on 207.189.120.14 X-Barracuda-Connect: smtp2.linux-foundation.org[207.189.120.14] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199848926 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38994 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 877 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: akpm@linux-foundation.org Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:00 -0800 Matt Helsley wrote: > > > > ... > > > Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other > > > people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch disagree), > > > I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm > > > sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code isn't allowed into the kernel > > > I think it is not unreasonable to at least expect the kernel to provide some > > > fundamental infrastructure that can be used for those (supposedly > > > unacceptable) bits. All I did here was utilizing the base infrastructure I want > > > added to clean up code that appeared pretty ad-hoc. > > > > > > > Ah. That's a brand new requirement. > > In all fairness it's not really a brand new requirement -- just one that > wasn't strongly emphasized during prior attempts to get something like > this in. > > I had a mostly-working patch for this on top of the Task Watchers v2 > patch set. I never posted that specific patch because it had a race with > module unloading and the fix only increased the overhead you were > unhappy with. I mentioned it briefly in my lengthy [PATCH 0/X] > description for Task Watchers v2 (http://lwn.net/Articles/207873/): > > "TODO: > ... > I'm working on three more patches that add support for creating a task > watcher from within a module using an ELF section. They haven't recieved > as much attention since I've been focusing on measuring the performance > impact of these patches." > > > > Would tainting the kernel upon registration of out-of-tree "notifiers" > be more acceptable? How does that work? module.c does the register/deregister on behalf of the module? I certainly encourage people to disagreee with me here, but my current thinking is: - the cleanup aspect isn't worth the runtime overhead and - the support-modular-users aspect is largely new and would need a lot more description and justification (with examples) before we can even begin to evaluate it. From matthltc@us.ibm.com Tue Jan 8 19:27:19 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:27:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m093RGAV012964 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:27:19 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199849249-481f028c0000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 5D412C32A16 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:27:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com (e4.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.144]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 5UXFD2HqS2TBKvYW for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:27:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m093RQu1014633 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 22:27:26 -0500 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m093RQjJ370522 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 22:27:26 -0500 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m093RPxP021817 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 22:27:26 -0500 Received: from dyn9047017068.beaverton.ibm.com (dyn9047017068.beaverton.ibm.com [9.47.17.68]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m093RPoc021742; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 22:27:25 -0500 X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier From: Matthew Helsley To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jan Beulich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com In-Reply-To: <1199845447.17010.149.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <1199845447.17010.149.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:27:23 -0800 Message-Id: <1199849244.17010.190.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Barracuda-Connect: e4.ny.us.ibm.com[32.97.182.144] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199849250 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38993 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 878 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: matthltc@us.ibm.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 18:24 -0800, Matt Helsley wrote: > On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 12:26 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > > > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves > > > directly into core files. > > > > I agree that we probably want something like this. As do some others, > > so we already had a few a few attempts at similar things. The first one > > is from SGI and called PAGG (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/) and also > > includes allocating per-task data for it's users. Then also from SGI > > there has been a simplified version called pnotify that's also available > > from the website above. > > > > Later Matt Helsley had something called "Task Watchers" which lwn has > > an article on: http://lwn.net/Articles/208117/. > > Apologies for the late reply -- I haven't had internet access for the > last few weeks. > > > For some reason neither ever made a lot of progess (performance > > problems?). > > Yeah. Some discussion on measuring the performance of Task Watchers: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lse/4698 > > The requirements for Task Watchers were: > > Allow sleeping in most/all notifier functions in these paths: > fork > exec > exit > change [re][ug]id > No performance overhead > One "chain" per path ("I only care about exec().") > Easy to use > Scales to large numbers of CPUs > Useful to make most in-tree code more readable. Task Watchers took > direct calls to these pieces of code out of the fork/exec/exit paths: > audit > semundo > cpusets > mempolicy > trace irqflags > lockdep > keys (for processes -- not for thread groups) > process events connector > Useful for loadable modules > > Performance overhead in microbenchmarks was measurable at around 1% (see > the URL above). Overhead on benchmarks like kernbench on the other hand > were in the noise margins (which were around 1.6%) and hence I couldn't > determine the overhead there. > > I never got the loadable module part completely working due to races > between notifier functions and the module unload path. The solution to > the races seemed to require adding more overhead to the notifier > function paths (SRCU-like grace periods). > > I stopped pushing the patch set because I hadn't found any new > optimizations to offset the overheads while still meeting all the > requirements and Andrew still felt that the "make it more readable" > argument was not sufficient to justify its inclusion. Oops. It's been nearly two years so I've forgotten exactly where Task Watchers v2 was when I stopped pushing it. After a bit more searching I found a more recent posting: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/14/384 And here's why I think the microbenchmark results improved to the point there was a small performance improvement over mainline: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/19/124 I seem to recall kernbench was still too noisy to tell. The patch allowing modules to register Task Watchers still isn't posted there for the reasons I've already described. Cheers, -Matt Helsley From matthltc@us.ibm.com Tue Jan 8 19:45:10 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:45:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m093j6P4014291 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:45:10 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199850322-79b700f80000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from over.ny.us.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 70C02826C48 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:45:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from over.ny.us.ibm.com (over.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.150]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id liq9XuGf4R8wWaCV for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:45:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]) by pokfb.esmtp.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m092Ombx012140 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 21:25:42 -0500 Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m092OG1w003842 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 21:24:16 -0500 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m092OGfA169714 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:24:16 -0700 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m092OFBb022615 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:24:15 -0700 Received: from dyn9047017068.beaverton.ibm.com (dyn9047017068.beaverton.ibm.com [9.47.17.68]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m092OEO8022378; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:24:14 -0700 X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier From: Matt Helsley To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jan Beulich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com In-Reply-To: <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:24:07 -0800 Message-Id: <1199845447.17010.149.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Barracuda-Connect: over.ny.us.ibm.com[32.97.182.150] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199850323 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.38993 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 879 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: matthltc@us.ibm.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 12:26 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:11:24PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > > With more and more sub-systems/sub-components leaving their footprint > > in task handling functions, it seems reasonable to add notifiers that > > these components can use instead of having them all patch themselves > > directly into core files. > > I agree that we probably want something like this. As do some others, > so we already had a few a few attempts at similar things. The first one > is from SGI and called PAGG (http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/) and also > includes allocating per-task data for it's users. Then also from SGI > there has been a simplified version called pnotify that's also available > from the website above. > > Later Matt Helsley had something called "Task Watchers" which lwn has > an article on: http://lwn.net/Articles/208117/. Apologies for the late reply -- I haven't had internet access for the last few weeks. > For some reason neither ever made a lot of progess (performance > problems?). Yeah. Some discussion on measuring the performance of Task Watchers: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lse/4698 The requirements for Task Watchers were: Allow sleeping in most/all notifier functions in these paths: fork exec exit change [re][ug]id No performance overhead One "chain" per path ("I only care about exec().") Easy to use Scales to large numbers of CPUs Useful to make most in-tree code more readable. Task Watchers took direct calls to these pieces of code out of the fork/exec/exit paths: audit semundo cpusets mempolicy trace irqflags lockdep keys (for processes -- not for thread groups) process events connector Useful for loadable modules Performance overhead in microbenchmarks was measurable at around 1% (see the URL above). Overhead on benchmarks like kernbench on the other hand were in the noise margins (which were around 1.6%) and hence I couldn't determine the overhead there. I never got the loadable module part completely working due to races between notifier functions and the module unload path. The solution to the races seemed to require adding more overhead to the notifier function paths (SRCU-like grace periods). I stopped pushing the patch set because I hadn't found any new optimizations to offset the overheads while still meeting all the requirements and Andrew still felt that the "make it more readable" argument was not sufficient to justify its inclusion. Jan, instead of adding notifiers could utrace be used or made to work for modules? Also, please add me to the Cc list for any reposts of the entire series. Thanks! Cheers, -Matt Helsley From jbeulich@novell.com Wed Jan 9 01:51:35 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:51:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m099pY3a016211 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 01:51:35 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199872306-06bd013f0000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id A66C3C345AB for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 01:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com (public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com [195.33.99.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id MS3UfOz2Fk4iGcd6 for ; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from EMEA1-MTA by public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:51:45 +0000 Message-Id: <4784A751.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.2 HP Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:52:01 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Andrew Morton" Cc: , , , , , X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline X-Barracuda-Connect: public.id2-vpn.continvity.gns.novell.com[195.33.99.129] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199872311 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.39019 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by oss.sgi.com id m099pY3a016211 X-archive-position: 880 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: jbeulich@novell.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg >> Am I to conclude then that there's no point in addressing the issues other >> people pointed out? While I (obviously, since I submitted the patch disagree), >> I'm not certain how others feel. My main point for disagreement here is (I'm >> sorry to repeat this) that as long as certain code isn't allowed into the kernel >> I think it is not unreasonable to at least expect the kernel to provide some >> fundamental infrastructure that can be used for those (supposedly >> unacceptable) bits. All I did here was utilizing the base infrastructure I want >> added to clean up code that appeared pretty ad-hoc. >> > >Ah. That's a brand new requirement. I'm sorry, but I didn't feel this was important, as I didn't expect the cleanup effect to cause much debate... >I think we'd need a pretty detailed description of the pain which this >would relieve before we would take such an extraordinary step. What are >those (unidentified) add-on features doing at present? Patching calls into >fork.c/exec.c/exit.c? Yes. And the unidentified feature is NLKD. But as with other notifiers (most notably the module unload one), all reasonable kernel debuggers should need them (or do explicit patching of the mentioned source files). As I explained before, I think that if kernel debuggers aren't allowed into the tree, they should at least be allowed to co-exist (since the argument of requiring in-tree users and submitting code for mainline inclusion is void if political/personal reasons exclude certain code from even being considered for inclusion). Jan From SRS0+78e64097b1c7b9be0fa9+1599+infradead.org+hch@pentafluge.srs.infradead.org Wed Jan 9 02:03:52 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:03:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m09A3nwn017371 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 02:03:52 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1199873045-2f0100060000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 5F9DEC34682; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 02:04:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org (pentafluge.infradead.org [213.146.154.40]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id OyTilrbMFk2ga8jV; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:04:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from hch by pentafluge.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1JCXmi-0001vR-Uo; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:03:44 +0000 Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:03:44 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Morton , hch@infradead.org, pagg@oss.sgi.com, erikj@sgi.com, pj@sgi.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] add task handling notifier Message-ID: <20080109100344.GA7342@infradead.org> References: <476A780C.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20071223122621.GA19310@infradead.org> <20071225140526.547a882f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <47838ACB.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <20080108141424.de5d8fba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4784A751.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4784A751.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html X-Barracuda-Connect: pentafluge.infradead.org[213.146.154.40] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1199873046 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.39019 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 881 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: hch@infradead.org Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:52:01AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > Yes. And the unidentified feature is NLKD. But as with other notifiers (most > notably the module unload one), all reasonable kernel debuggers should > need them (or do explicit patching of the mentioned source files). As I > explained before, I think that if kernel debuggers aren't allowed into the > tree, they should at least be allowed to co-exist (since the argument of > requiring in-tree users and submitting code for mainline inclusion is void > if political/personal reasons exclude certain code from even being > considered for inclusion). We already have a kernel debugger in tree, xmon. There's anotherone hopefully getting in soon (kgdb), so they can do the right thing as the other subsystems. And as usual, we're not going to provide hooks for out of tree mess. From userservices@ITtoolbox.com Mon Jan 14 20:24:34 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:24:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0F4OXiM027273 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:24:34 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1200371090-7ddf02490000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from blogs.ittoolbox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 6B1B351CBDA for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:24:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from blogs.ittoolbox.com (blogs-db.ittoolbox.com [66.179.234.53]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id yyucay0gzFXxlOur for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:24:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.0.206] (helo=WEB3.ittoolbox.local) by blogs.ittoolbox.com with smtp (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1JEdM8-00075r-Hb for pagg@oss.sgi.com; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:24:56 -0500 From: "mark smith" To: pagg@oss.sgi.com X-ASG-Orig-Subj: RECIEVABLE CLERK NEEDED?? Subject: RECIEVABLE CLERK NEEDED?? Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:24:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20080114-23245057-23bc@WEB3.ittoolbox.local> X-MimeOLE: Produced by AspEMail MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Barracuda-Connect: blogs-db.ittoolbox.com[66.179.234.53] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1200371091 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.1753 1.0000 -0.9603 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.18 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.18 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD, FROM_HAS_ULINE_NUMS X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.39553 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.22 FROM_HAS_ULINE_NUMS From: contains an underline and numbers/letters 0.93 FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD 'From' yahoo.com does not match 'Received' headers X-archive-position: 882 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: mrmark_smithz00220@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg The following is vacant in our prestigeous company,need a dedicated and honest worker for an immediate employment.Contact MR MARK SMITH the admin manager for more information about the offerat: mrmark_smithz00220@yahoo.com To accept my invitation, please go to: http://my.ittoolbox.com/connect/?inviteid=407825&code=348067RBz51T1R9q02r6 Thanks, mark smith My ITtoolbox Profile: http://www.ittoolbox.com/profiles/mrmark_smithz00330 GET CONNECTED. WORK EFFECTIVELY. http://my.ittoolbox.com/ ITtoolbox is a professional community where peers share knowledge about information technology. It's free and takes only a few minutes to join. At ITtoolbox, you will find experts and peers to communicate and share knowledge with. You'll also find active discussion groups where you can ask or answer questions and get real answers, start a blog or learn from and communicate with passionate bloggers, create or edit wiki articles, or review the latest IT whitepapers, vendors and products. From boyle@maine.edu Sun Jan 27 18:02:40 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:02:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0S22cIM016616 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:02:40 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1201485776-0f3503b80000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from chert.unet.maine.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 8062BD13208; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:02:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from chert.unet.maine.edu (chert.unet.maine.edu [130.111.32.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id muKIECuNd3oDlCWd; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:02:57 -0800 (PST) X-UmaineSystem-MailScanner-Watermark: 1202090223.34987@fjIia+OiA7EMAbTB2xg8DQ Received: from chert.unet.maine.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chert.unet.maine.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0S1uwop028903 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:57:02 -0500 Received: (from apache@localhost) by chert.unet.maine.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id m0S1rap5027846; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:53:36 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: chert.unet.maine.edu: apache set sender to boyle@maine.edu using -f Received: from 41.220.75.3 (75-3.vgccl.net [41.220.75.3]) by mail1.maine.edu (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:53:35 +0000 Message-ID: <20080128015335.smpvl7sco44swsw0@mail1.maine.edu> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:53:35 +0000 From: "westernfinanceagency@msn.com" Reply-To: westernfinanceagency@msn.com To: undisclosed-recipients:; X-ASG-Orig-Subj: WFA?/wfb/lf/memo:00121203 (2008-1st QUARTER SEARCH AND CERTIFICATION EXERCISE). Subject: ***** SUSPECTED SPAM ***** WFA?/wfb/lf/memo:00121203 (2008-1st QUARTER SEARCH AND CERTIFICATION EXERCISE). MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.5) X-DCC-UniversityOfMaineSystem-Metrics: chert.unet.maine.edu; whitelist X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: boyle@maine.edu X-Barracuda-Connect: chert.unet.maine.edu[130.111.32.28] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1201485779 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.5099 1.0000 0.7500 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 2.89 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: Yes, SCORE=2.89 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests=RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO, UNDISC_RECIPS X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.40644 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.88 UNDISC_RECIPS Valid-looking To "undisclosed-recipients" 1.25 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO X-Priority: 5 (Lowest) X-MSMail-Priority: Low Importance: Low X-Barracuda-Spam-Flag: YES Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by oss.sgi.com id m0S22cIM016616 X-archive-position: 883 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: boyle@maine.edu Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg WESTERN FINANCE AGENCY, FINANCE HOUSE, Oxford Road, Manchester, M60 1SJ, UNITED KINGDOM. Our Ref: WFA?/wfb/lf/memo:00121203.   MEMO:  2008-1st Quarter-Online Search and Certification Exercise.   Greetings, I am Mr. Walker Edman, I am the CEO of Western Finance Agency Inc.?, financed by Wells Fargo Bank, Wells Fargo: 1 California Street, San Francisco, CA.  94111,we issue loans to applicants, who have filled our form and accepted our terms and condition. We are in search of representatives who would assist the company in receiving loan payment and sending to applicant, currently we have over 35 applicants waiting confirmation. All you have to do is receive loan payment from us, take off 15%, which would be your commission payment, and you have the rest sent to the applicants on which information?s and instruction of where the money would be sent to would be given to you. If you are interested in this, do get back to me with the information below for our record purposes and background verification: - First Name:............................... Surname:................................. Residential Address:..................................................... Phone:..................................... Age:..........................   Mail the above information to: westernfinanceagency@msn.com Do get back to me if you are interested with what the company has to offer. Note that this would in no way affect your current job; it?s a contract base job. Regards, Mr. Walker Edman, CEO (GENERAL MANAGER), WESTERN FINANCE AGENCY Inc.? TEL: +447031906259 E-MAIL: westernfinanceagency@msn.com (C) 2008 Western Finance Agency Inc.?~Manchester~UK~. All rights reserved. From boyle@maine.edu Sun Jan 27 18:06:43 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:06:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0S26gB1016781 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:06:43 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1201486022-193d00f30000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from chert.unet.maine.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 164D5D130CB; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:07:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from chert.unet.maine.edu (chert.unet.maine.edu [130.111.32.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id i0gZEaRFaycsr1Zt; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:07:02 -0800 (PST) X-UmaineSystem-MailScanner-Watermark: 1202090510.80523@9H0iL2BG0g3SGbZ6OdmXoA Received: from chert.unet.maine.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chert.unet.maine.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0S21IlR030474 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:01:19 -0500 Received: (from apache@localhost) by chert.unet.maine.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id m0S1wdZR029518; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:58:39 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: chert.unet.maine.edu: apache set sender to boyle@maine.edu using -f Received: from 41.220.75.3 (75-3.vgccl.net [41.220.75.3]) by mail1.maine.edu (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:58:38 +0000 Message-ID: <20080128015838.f8yik623kg8c0gwo@mail1.maine.edu> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:58:38 +0000 From: "westernfinanceagency@msn.com" Reply-To: westernfinanceagency@msn.com To: undisclosed-recipients:; X-ASG-Orig-Subj: WFA?/wfb/lf/memo:00121203 (2008-1st QUARTER SEARCH AND CERTIFICATION EXERCISE). Subject: ***** SUSPECTED SPAM ***** WFA?/wfb/lf/memo:00121203 (2008-1st QUARTER SEARCH AND CERTIFICATION EXERCISE). MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.5) X-DCC-UniversityOfMaineSystem-Metrics: chert.unet.maine.edu; whitelist X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: boyle@maine.edu X-Barracuda-Connect: chert.unet.maine.edu[130.111.32.28] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1201486023 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.5099 1.0000 0.7500 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 2.89 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: Yes, SCORE=2.89 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests=RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO, UNDISC_RECIPS X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.40645 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.88 UNDISC_RECIPS Valid-looking To "undisclosed-recipients" 1.25 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO X-Priority: 5 (Lowest) X-MSMail-Priority: Low Importance: Low X-Barracuda-Spam-Flag: YES Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by oss.sgi.com id m0S26gB1016781 X-archive-position: 884 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: boyle@maine.edu Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg WESTERN FINANCE AGENCY, FINANCE HOUSE, Oxford Road, Manchester, M60 1SJ, UNITED KINGDOM. Our Ref: WFA?/wfb/lf/memo:00121203.   MEMO:  2008-1st Quarter-Online Search and Certification Exercise.   Greetings, I am Mr. Walker Edman, I am the CEO of Western Finance Agency Inc.?, financed by Wells Fargo Bank, Wells Fargo: 1 California Street, San Francisco, CA.  94111,we issue loans to applicants, who have filled our form and accepted our terms and condition. We are in search of representatives who would assist the company in receiving loan payment and sending to applicant, currently we have over 35 applicants waiting confirmation. All you have to do is receive loan payment from us, take off 15%, which would be your commission payment, and you have the rest sent to the applicants on which information?s and instruction of where the money would be sent to would be given to you. If you are interested in this, do get back to me with the information below for our record purposes and background verification: - First Name:............................... Surname:................................. Residential Address:..................................................... Phone:..................................... Age:..........................   Mail the above information to: westernfinanceagency@msn.com Do get back to me if you are interested with what the company has to offer. Note that this would in no way affect your current job; it?s a contract base job. Regards, Mr. Walker Edman, CEO (GENERAL MANAGER), WESTERN FINANCE AGENCY Inc.? TEL: +447031906259 E-MAIL: westernfinanceagency@msn.com (C) 2008 Western Finance Agency Inc.?~Manchester~UK~. All rights reserved. From judithhernandez19276@yahoo.com Tue Jan 29 07:07:34 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:07:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0TF7Vwk006036 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:07:34 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1201619268-37c803130000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from n5.bullet.mail.re4.yahoo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with SMTP id 9E3B15740ED for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:07:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from n5.bullet.mail.re4.yahoo.com (n5.bullet.mail.re4.yahoo.com [206.190.56.24]) by cuda.sgi.com with SMTP id leC0q7KYJLdojm7f for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:07:48 -0800 (PST) X-ASG-RBL-Restriction: new.spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net Received: from [68.142.237.89] by n5.bullet.re4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2008 15:04:28 -0000 Received: from [216.252.122.216] by t5.bullet.re3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2008 15:04:28 -0000 Received: from [69.147.65.158] by t1.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2008 15:04:28 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp406.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2008 15:04:28 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-5 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 710863.82906.bm@omp406.mail.sp1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 81384 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Jan 2008 15:04:23 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=ovpDLnlOeM94tJn7Ny1ltJIq5N9KPJaBQim0mYsC0zttAq4J6cWKaiRuQ7oKe4sVoIu/QJfiLo8+Nqam+YtAunyzK+Pf33V7YHnwnlhkOxdFTQHTxPz1KfpnE+HH3Ey9r+rlGTeCUI17fu64FsZhHbXmkbjJf/xUdjGy4JYKBuY=; X-YMail-OSG: LLzYNh8VM1nor7KzaT28KUHGAN13OQ0OuntXcqnd Received: from [63.165.0.29] by web45910.mail.sp1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:04:23 PST Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:04:23 -0800 (PST) From: Judith Hernandez X-ASG-Orig-Subj: hi Subject: ***** SUSPECTED SPAM ***** hi To: T MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1444347294-1201619063=:76254" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <315539.76254.qm@web45910.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> X-Barracuda-Connect: n5.bullet.mail.re4.yahoo.com[206.190.56.24] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1201619272 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.5000 1.0000 0.0000 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-ASG-Tag: RBL (new.spam.dnsbl.sorbs.net ) X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.40789 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Priority: 5 (Lowest) X-MSMail-Priority: Low Importance: Low X-Barracuda-Spam-Flag: YES X-archive-position: 885 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: judithhernandez19276@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg --0-1444347294-1201619063=:76254 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit www.amy.contactpersonal.com Unsubscribe --------------------------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. --0-1444347294-1201619063=:76254 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit www.amy.contactpersonal.com




















Unsubscribe

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. --0-1444347294-1201619063=:76254-- From taliala74@gmail.com Tue Jan 29 16:45:15 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list pagg); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0U0jEoZ004447 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:15 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1201653933-13b200f90000-ks8pgv X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 44D62D3C848 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.171]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id yq8I4SzTCbr8VHAu for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o29so378697ugd.20 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:to:subject:date:mime-version:x-mailer:x-mimeole:thread-index:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from; bh=v3NCfym9urQV5b6aMZwMeVhrHL9ZH2wUgyLEIVSUrr8=; b=mSt7LAibuIYs1+bIRGi2D+LwtrTNkcdmjrXbXEIhegmqHSX7O/yUASizUOmgUTAIiuG4HkK9no+3iwGQPIrHaIXfihRT0nZDMgMY0Dywf4Y/C+Euk+Umhs4926N+CCw826uVap/epFbJHxcm4fbVirPwVvQbRBsfQIj5zxhGb+4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:to:subject:date:mime-version:x-mailer:x-mimeole:thread-index:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from; b=Z7ND6HcpHkD0a2NL/SsRtDQImJpBB+Mj5pR3nai6LXJ0vTlGdG4jh9Yv3/pD1ytpq/nN1fZI/earJzLox/7ATGORqNhG4/vUGTG3Hhw+RC7BS1XRhvfNLqKTXIafApcC7TTQjnFfWvrpssYzD5Yi85AnE+waBl/aJD82thQhSIA= Received: by 10.67.119.15 with SMTP id w15mr2099331ugm.73.1201653927060; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?76.217.67.211? ( [76.217.67.211]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j33sm1432205ugc.63.2008.01.29.16.45.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:45:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: To: X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Be all that you can be masochism Subject: Be all that you can be masochism Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:29:35 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Thread-Index: pxCyydwFV0wlsaXZSQcTVvIHUrFpKtp7Ve33 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: disinformation X-Barracuda-Connect: ug-out-1314.google.com[66.249.92.171] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1201653935 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.5273 1.0000 0.7500 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.75 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.75 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.40828 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-archive-position: 886 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: pagg-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: taliala74@gmail.com Precedence: bulk X-list: pagg Make her worship you your online shop. http://medbestequal.com secure ordering, very fast chipping diatribe initiatory resistless handicap