False Alarm: Re: Strange beeping

Matthew Burgess matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Aug 10 11:14:09 PDT 2004

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 04:31:11 -0400
Jason Kircher <cdrradar at speakeasy.net> wrote:

> On Tuesday 10 August 2004 03:44, Rainer P. Feller wrote:
> > What do we learn from this?
> > A PC is not the only pice of electronic to be able to beep :-)
> > And we might get serious problems if we continue to spend all of our
> > time glued to keyboard, mouse and our eyes only seing what a fancy
> > gfx is showing us ;-)
> >
> > HEY MAN! there is a real world out there!
> > hm ... which version?
> I dunno, but I know mine's lacking a few features.  If only it was
> this easy to upgrade, right?  :P

I want to know how to resolve the various driver conflicts in my world. 
It seems as though 80% of resources are being held by 20% of the drivers
(that is assuming Pareto's law holds for *everything* - I have a feeling
the percentages are a little too optimistic in this case!).  Not only
that, but a couple of them would appear to be performing 'kill -9' on 
processes they think are in a rogue state.  You thought that
the Linux OOM killer was bad, you oughta see this!  Maybe they mistook
the Windows Driver Model for WMD?

Unfortunately, I'm only in user-space, so I can't do anything other than
watch in horror as the whole thing starts grinding itself to a halt.  If
only I could somehow get them to understand the `nice` or `halt`
commands!  Whilst the kernel hackers are busy hashing out scheduler
fixes as we speak, I don't think anything other than a complete rewrite
of the offending drivers will cure Real World's problems, and even that
assumes a lot about their replacements.



More information about the lfs-chat mailing list