[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1929106] Re: runc -v empty output

2021-05-20 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
** Package changed: linux (Ubuntu) => runc (Ubuntu) ** Changed in: runc (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1929106 Title: runc -v e

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1929106] [NEW] runc -v empty output

2021-05-20 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
Public bug reported: Apparently runc is built in some non-standard way, so it does not show its version: kir@ubu2004:~$ runc -v runc version spec: 1.0.2-dev go: go1.13.8 libseccomp: 2.5.1 In the output above, version string is empty and there is no newline added, so we have a version of the spec

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1832795] Re: updates to aufs

2019-07-29 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
Thank you for looking! I'm afraid there is no easy/fast reproducer available, and as far as I remember it takes hours or days of stress testing to get to it. I can't think of any decent way to validate other than to check the aufs module version... Once a kernel build is available, I can certainly

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1832795] Re: updates to aufs

2019-06-17 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
The nature of this bug is clear and it does not require any logs, so setting the status to "confirmed". In case anyone needs anything, please let me know and I'll do my best. ** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you ar

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1832795] [NEW] updates to aufs

2019-06-13 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
Public bug reported: I have found and reported a critical bug in aufs (as shipped with the latest Ubuntu kernels, both on Bionic and Xenial), which potentially affects anyone running Docker on Ubuntu using aufs graph driver. The fix has been developed, tested at least by me to fix the issue, and c

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1670041] Re: Poor performance of Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac (rev 32) (Killer Wireless 1535)

2017-11-11 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
FWIW, I replaced the Atheros card with Intel 8265, which I bought for $20 on amazon (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0721MLM8B) and haven't had any problems since. iperf results are way more stable than with Atheros. I suggest everyone to do the same thing. -- You received this bug notificatio

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1670041] Re: Poor performance of Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac (rev 32) (Killer Wireless 1535)

2017-08-01 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
This is with cubic: limit = max(2 * skb->truesize, sk->sk_pacing_rate >> 6); min 123.00 max 220.00 avg 194.81 num 80 and reno: limit = max(2 * skb->truesize, sk->sk_pacing_rate >> 6); min 129.00 max 224.00 avg 192.71 num 80 I suspect that iperf/iperf3 might not be a good (repres

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1670041] Re: Poor performance of Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac (rev 32) (Killer Wireless 1535)

2017-08-01 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
Eric, Once again, thanks for looking into this, and sorry for being slow. Here are the results for 4.13-rc3 kernel using BBR congestion control: kir@kd:~/wifiperf/4.13-rc3/2$ cat results limit = max(2 * skb->truesize, sk->sk_pacing_rate >> 10); min 7.64 max 17.30 avg 13.92 num 40

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1670041] Re: Poor performance of Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac (rev 32) (Killer Wireless 1535)

2017-07-14 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
Eric, thank you for looking at it! I have measured all four variants that you have suggested, as well as the default ones, using linux-4.12.1 as a base. The summary of measurements is below. Note that - min/max/avg is in Mbits/sec; - n is number of measurements, each of 1 second. + limit

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1670041] Re: Poor performance of Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac (rev 32) (Killer Wireless 1535)

2017-06-29 Thread Kir Kolyshkin
I also suffer from the same bug on dell xps 13 9360, tcp wi-fi is 5-10x slower than on other devices. @kalle we understand the patch you refer to is just a workaround, not a solution. Is anyone working on a real fix? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packag