Updating PCI vendors database
It looks like our /usr/share/misc/pci_vendors list (used only by pciconf as far as I can tell) has become rather stale. We also appear to be tracking sources which no longer exist. Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? It helps that our pciconf looks to be compatible with that format. We just ignore subvendor and subdevice, but it doesn't appear to matter that the file contains this information. I could cull the subvendor/subdevice from the list though. Any views? Reason I'm looking into this is because one of my customers would like their name to be correct when I import the driver I've been working on for them. :) - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Updating PCI vendors database
On 2011-04-04 16:10:16 (+0200), Philip Paeps phi...@freebsd.org wrote: Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? It occurs to me that people would want to verify that this list does actually work and that we gain (rather than lose) coverage from it. A sanity test I've run on a couple of machines: % fetch http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids % pciconf -lv /tmp/pciconflv.old % PCICONF_VENDOR_DATABASE=pci.ids pciconf -lv /tmp/pciconflv.new % diff -u /tmp/pciconflv.old /tmp/pciconflv.new In all cases I've seen so far, the new list yields better (more correct and up to date) results than the exising list. In no cases has pciconf complained about the new list. - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Updating PCI vendors database
On 2011-04-04 07:31:53 (-0700), Garrett Cooper gcoo...@freebsd.org wrote: On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Philip Paeps phi...@freebsd.org wrote: On 2011-04-04 16:10:16 (+0200), Philip Paeps phi...@freebsd.org wrote: Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? It occurs to me that people would want to verify that this list does actually work and that we gain (rather than lose) coverage from it. A sanity test I've run on a couple of machines: % fetch http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids % pciconf -lv /tmp/pciconflv.old % PCICONF_VENDOR_DATABASE=pci.ids pciconf -lv /tmp/pciconflv.new % diff -u /tmp/pciconflv.old /tmp/pciconflv.new In all cases I've seen so far, the new list yields better (more correct and up to date) results than the exising list. In no cases has pciconf complained about the new list. I've copy-pasted the discussion I brought this up to Warner/Brooks several months ago for review. I think at that point, the lists we're currently sourcing still existed. As of this morning, I don't seem to be able to find Craig Hart's list of PCI IDs anywhere on the net. It's certainly no long available at the address listed in the source tree. The big problem is that the descriptions with the previous source and the new source clash, so this would cause a huge amount of diff churn; This would be a problem I agree, but not a huge one. If the churn would be too large, I would be hesitant to push this to any stable branches. But I don't think the churn should be a problem for HEAD. It doesn't look to me like the churn is too large on the machines I've used it on. Generally, the changes I've seen is devices which lacked a device description now have one, and devices which had a wrong or incomplete description now have a complete and (as far as I can tell) correct one. This feels like an improvement to me. :) plus I think there are a few entries missing from each area (at least there were the last time I looked -- maybe our pci_vendors is more spartan than the new source is today). The new list is much more complete than the list we have currently. For one thing, it also includes subvendors and subdevices, which the current list lacks. Our pciconf doesn't care about those currently, but could be made to care. I also don't think we should underestimate the value of sharing a list with Linux (especially if the licence on the list is friendly to sharing it) and potentially other operating system vendors. - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Updating PCI vendors database
On 2011-04-04 17:39:22 (+0300), Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 04/04/2011 17:10 Philip Paeps said the following: It looks like our /usr/share/misc/pci_vendors list (used only by pciconf as far as I can tell) has become rather stale. We also appear to be tracking sources which no longer exist. Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? It helps that our pciconf looks to be compatible with that format. We just ignore subvendor and subdevice, but it doesn't appear to matter that the file contains this information. I could cull the subvendor/subdevice from the list though. Any views? Reason I'm looking into this is because one of my customers would like their name to be correct when I import the driver I've been working on for them. :) This is just for your information: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.current/127979/focus=128577 Maybe you'll find something useful there. Thanks. I've just read through that discussion. It doesn't look like there were any serious objections to pulling in the new list, other than verifying that the new list contains all the entries the current list contains. I am not entirely sure what the little side-discussion about using # instead of ; as a comment marker is about. It looks to me like the pci.ids file Just Works[tm] with our pciconf(8). Maybe Garrett can elaborate on that? I think we should just go with the new list, but I'll hold off for a bit to let others object. ;) - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. You can't fix it if it ain't broke. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Updating PCI vendors database
On 2011-04-04 08:51:03 (-0700), Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Philip Paeps phi...@freebsd.org wrote: On 2011-04-04 17:39:22 (+0300), Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 04/04/2011 17:10 Philip Paeps said the following: Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? It helps that our pciconf looks to be compatible with that format. We just ignore subvendor and subdevice, but it doesn't appear to matter that the file contains this information. [...] This is just for your information: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.current/127979/focus=128577 Maybe you'll find something useful there. Thanks. I've just read through that discussion. It doesn't look like there were any serious objections to pulling in the new list, other than verifying that the new list contains all the entries the current list contains. I am not entirely sure what the little side-discussion about using # instead of ; as a comment marker is about. It looks to me like the pci.ids file Just Works[tm] with our pciconf(8). Maybe Garrett can elaborate on that? Well, close. You can substitute the hashes with semicolons, but you need to get rid of subvendor / subdevice. The presence of the subvendor/subdevice entries doesn't appear to affect the correctness of the output on the machines I've tested it on. Cursorily reading through the pciconf(8) source code suggests it ignores that data (and as it happens the presence of subvendors and subdevices). I think the most correct thing to do would be to teach pciconf(8) about subvendors and subdevices and pull in the new list as-is. I'll take a look at adding support for that later today. It shouldn't be much work. Setting PCICONF_VENDOR_DATABASE to pci.ids worked, but all the items on my box are different in the new file (all device descriptions, but also some of the vendor descriptions dealing with my nVidia card, Realtek NIC, and LSI card) [it would be interesting to see who's correct in terms of corporation branding :)..]. So this definitely isn't MFC-able :). It doesn't look like they're fundamentally different through. The strings changed, but still seem to be describing the same devices. I'm happy to agree that this isn't MFC-able. I think we should just go with the new list, but I'll hold off for a bit to let others object. ;) +1, just for the fact that our sources are becoming stale. I wonder though what other OSes like NetBSD/OpenBSD/[Open]Solaris/IlluminOS use however for tracking PCI IDs, as the sources for pci.ids aren't necessarily the vendor itself and in some cases are end-users. I thought some of our other sources were based on data provided by vendors. A comment from jfv@ in the thread from a few months ago, suggests that at least Intel contributes directly to the pci.ids list. One measurement isn't a valid statistic though. - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Updating PCI vendors database
On 2011-04-04 17:44:29 (+0200), Alex Dupre a...@freebsd.org wrote: Philip Paeps ha scritto: This is just for your information: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.current/127979/focus=128577 Maybe you'll find something useful there. Thanks. I've just read through that discussion. It doesn't look like there were any serious objections to pulling in the new list, other than verifying that the new list contains all the entries the current list contains. The discussion went on privately (dunno why) beetween John, Warner, Brooks, me and a few others. I suggest you to contact John Baldwin before taking actions, I've updated also the merged lists. Thanks. I'll talk to them. - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. I thought that said Windows has been installed for your safety. -- SlimeyPete, looking at safety signs on a train ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Updating PCI vendors database
On 2011-04-04 11:04:38 (-0700), Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: On 04/04/2011 07:10, Philip Paeps wrote: It looks like our /usr/share/misc/pci_vendors list (used only by pciconf as far as I can tell) has become rather stale. We also appear to be tracking sources which no longer exist. Would anyone object if I updated this list to source the same database used by Linux distributions at http://pciids.sourceforge.net/v2.2/pci.ids? It helps that our pciconf looks to be compatible with that format. We just ignore subvendor and subdevice, but it doesn't appear to matter that the file contains this information. I could cull the subvendor/subdevice from the list though. Any views? Having read this thread, and the last one, my opinion is, let's do it already. :) I'll wait a little longer for more comments but then: yes, I'll go and do it. Repo churn should not, under any circumstances, be a consideration in technical improvements. I agree with those who have said that the new list should be confirmed to be a superset of the old, and anything missing should be merged in. Checking with Jack about Intel stuff is also reasonable, as would be cross-checking with what NetBSD and OpenBSD are doing (and perhaps communicating with them about your work). So, not a slam-dunk, but definitely a clear path forward. Oh, and I personally don't see a problem with MFC'ing this, but I'm willing to be convinced. I was thinking of putting it in head and waiting a good while for the screaming to subside and the fires to go out before raising the idea of merging it to stable. Barring any clear counterindications, I'll just do this in the next day or so. - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am phi...@freebsd.org subscribed to the list. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: crypto(9) choose another driver if we cannot open a session on it
On 2008-12-07 22:45:51 (+0100), Patrick Lamaizière [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote a small patch to allow the crypto framework to choose another cryptographic driver if we cannot open a session on the driver. Very cool. :-) I've been hacking on this too, mainly to get rid of the code duplication that currently exists. That should not break anything. It would be nice to test it on a box with a Geode LX CPU and a crypto device like a VPN1411 card. I don't have the hardware but I've checked that we revert to the cryptosoft driver when using ipsec and glxsb with AES key's length != 128 bits. I'll test that tonight. I think I've got a hifn card hiding somewhere near a soekris. Thanks! - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribed to the list. Maybe you should loosen her clothing or something. -- Gaspode the wonder dog (Terry Pratchett, Moving Pictures) ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Csup cvsmode build discussion
On 2008-01-16 10:33:02 (+0100), Ulf Lilleengen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, the base system already have flex, but the flex version in base is heavily outdated (version 2.5.4 versus 2.5.34 in ports) and does not support reentrancy. Is there a reason why it's outdated? What I can think of is that it is either unmaintained, or that developers want it to disappear from base. I think it's just unmaintained in base ... I wonder what it would take to update it. /me takes a look - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribed to the list. Da da da da da da da da da, yeah yeah yeah yeah, da da da da da da da da da, yeah yeah yeah yeah... -- Various people singing along to Man On The Moon without knowing the words ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Csup cvsmode build discussion
On 2008-01-16 16:06:56 (+0100), Ulf Lilleengen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, this might only fix the issue with yacc if I'm thinking correctly, because the lexer also needs to be told about this for reentrancy. (But perhaps a much smaller problem since it's a matter of updating the lex version in base). I found that updating the lex in base was surprisingly easy. :-) I'll clean up my patches and post them for review later this evening. - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribed to the list. One day a tortoise will learn how to fly. -- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods) ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AoE for FreeBSD
On 2004-11-10 15:36:26 (-0500), Sam Hopkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a quick note to mention that I've added AoE support to FreeBSD 4.10, 5.3, and 6.0. Patches are available at http://www.coraid.com/support/freebsd. If anyone knows where else I could announce this, I'd appreciate it. Is someone planning to commit this? This is great stuff :-) - Philip -- Philip PaepsPlease don't Cc me, I am [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribed to the list. No one keeps a record of decisions you could have made but didn't. Everyone keeps a records of your bad ones. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anyone where to get a signed SSL certificate cheap?
On 2003-02-05 18:17:24 (+), Josef Karthauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I need to obtain a certificate to use on my openssl/apache web server, but looking at Verisign and Thawte it appears that they're charging a lot of money ($450) per year for one! Does anyone know where I can get one cheaper? Last time I bought I'm sure that they were only $100/yr each. There are quite a few places willing to cell you certificates for $100 or less, but the problem is that those usually cause big red error-messages to pop up on the users' screen. I buy my certificates from GlobalSign http://www.globalsign.com/, which sells them to me for ¤175/yr. Their root certificate is recognised by most browsers I've encountered. p.s. yes, I know that I could self-sign, but this is for an ecommerce system and I'd prefer our customer's customers not to have to ask themselves why the certificate is in our name and not our customer's! :) You'd have the same problem with the $100/yr certificates. Most browsers don't recognise them (bloody monopoly :-/) and pop up doomsday warnings... - Philip -- Philip Paeps Please don't CC me, I am [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribed to the list. BOFH Excuse #199: the curls in your keyboard cord are losing electricity. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Cardreaders and touchscreens?
Hi there - One of my clients would like me to hack together an application involving a cardreader and a touchscreen. How would I deal with these two rather 'odd' pieces of hardware. I didn't have any say in the purchasing of the touchscreen, but I suppose that shouldn't give me any trouble? It's just a keyboard/mouse combination in a strange shape, as I see it? The cardreader is another story. I'm free in choosing one which I can get to work. Does anyone have any experience with these things under FreeBSD? Any brands/types from which I *really* should stay away? Thanks for any info! - Philip -- Philip Paeps [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.paeps.cx/ +32 486 114 720 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
