Re: Binding process to a fixed processor
Actually I am looking for some command or system call which I can execute from my user level program so that I can bind one of my process to a processor. like pbind command in Linux.. Or do I have to write a system call to do that ?? Dennis Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dennis George wrote: Hi, I am working on freeBSD 5.2. Dennis Julian Elischer wrote: Dennis George wrote: Hi all, I am working on a intel based multi processor system. I like to know how can I bind one process permanently to one processor. and other one for general use. You can bind a thread to one processor, in the kernel, but I don't know offhand if there is a user interface for it however.. (I'd have to go look at the code again). (goes to look) There is code that can bind a thread to the current processor that it is on, but nothing uses it that I can see.. If you wrote a kernel module you could write your own syscall to use it.. This is of course different from binding a thread to a processor EXCLUSIVELY so that no other thread can use it. thanks in advance Dennis which version of the system are you using? - Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Support for SMT in latest FreeBSD
Hi, Acutally I was wondering if there is no support for SMT / SMP then can freeBSD support dual processors. Or can I utlize dual-processor in its fullness ? Dennis Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dennis George wrote: Hi all, I looking for SMT capability in freeBSD.. And found the following extract in a document... saying that 4.3 BSD has no support for SMT. does the current/latest version of freeBSCD (5.2 or 6.0) has the support for SMT ?? yes.. it's the current area of development. what do you want and I can tell you how well we support you.. It (4.3 BSD) has no support for processor affinity or binding. It also has no mechanism for distinguishing between CPUs of varying capability, which is important for SMT (Symmetric Multi-Threading). Thanks in advance... Dennis - Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Support for SMT in latest FreeBSD
Dennis George wrote: Hi, Acutally I was wondering if there is no support for SMT / SMP then can freeBSD support dual processors. Or can I utlize dual-processor in its fullness ? yes. in 5.3 or 6.0 very yes in 5.2 yes in 4.x mostly yes :-) Dennis Julian Elischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dennis George wrote: Hi all, I looking for SMT capability in freeBSD.. And found the following extract in a document... saying that 4.3 BSD has no support for SMT. does the current/latest version of freeBSCD (5.2 or 6.0) has the support for SMT ?? yes.. it's the current area of development. what do you want and I can tell you how well we support you.. It (4.3 BSD) has no support for processor affinity or binding. It also has no mechanism for distinguishing between CPUs of varying capability, which is important for SMT (Symmetric Multi-Threading). Thanks in advance... Dennis - Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Support for SMT in latest FreeBSD
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Julian Elischer wrote: Dennis George wrote: Hi, Acutally I was wondering if there is no support for SMT / SMP then can freeBSD support dual processors. Or can I utlize dual-processor in its fullness ? Actually, I think he's more insterested in threading across multiple processors, so: yes. in 5.3 or 6.0 very yes With libpthread or libthr in 5.3 and -current, yes. With libc_r, no. in 5.2 yes With libkse (renamed to libpthread in 5.3 and -current) and libthr, yes, but both are experimental in this release. You really want 5.3 or -current if you want to use libpthread or libthr. With libc_r, no. in 4.x mostly yes Only with the linuxthreads port. With libc_r, no. Neither libpthread nor libthr are available for 4.x (and won't be). There is no pbind() or processor_bind() (ala Solaris) in FreeBSD (yet). Julian has to add them ;-) -- Dan Eischen ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE stopped logging?
I'm trying to figure out why my firewall has stopped logging to /var/log/security. The last entry was from Aug 17 and there has been at least one restart and a few hundred thousand packets denied. FreeBSD * 5.2.1-RELEASE-p8 FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p8 #1: Thu Jul 1 18:24:26 CDT 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MOLEMAN i386 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):~:#ipfw list | tail -2 03000 deny log tcp from any to any in via xl0 setup 65535 deny ip from any to any ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):~:#sysctl net.inet.ip.fw net.inet.ip.fw.enable: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.autoinc_step: 100 net.inet.ip.fw.one_pass: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.debug: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.verbose: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.verbose_limit: 0 (truncated) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):~:#grep security /etc/syslog.conf security.* /var/log/security What am I missing? -- Ryan leadZERO Sommers Gamer's Impact President [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 1019590 AIM/MSN: leadZERO -= http://www.gamersimpact.com =- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE stopped logging?
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, 08:32-0600, Ryan Sommers wrote: I'm trying to figure out why my firewall has stopped logging to /var/log/security. The last entry was from Aug 17 and there has been at least one restart and a few hundred thousand packets denied. FreeBSD * 5.2.1-RELEASE-p8 FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p8 #1: Thu Jul 1 18:24:26 CDT 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MOLEMAN i386 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):~:#ipfw list | tail -2 03000 deny log tcp from any to any in via xl0 setup 65535 deny ip from any to any ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):~:#sysctl net.inet.ip.fw net.inet.ip.fw.enable: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.autoinc_step: 100 net.inet.ip.fw.one_pass: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.debug: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.verbose: 1 net.inet.ip.fw.verbose_limit: 0 (truncated) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):~:#grep security /etc/syslog.conf security.* /var/log/security What am I missing? Previous ipfw rules, 'ipfw sh' instead of 'ipfw list' and a tail of the /var/log/security :-) -- Maxim Konovalov ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Large FreeBSD Users / Impressive Metrics
I'm working on updating our advocacy material used on the website, in the Handbook, and now in a set of generic slides that can be used or adapted for presentations. If you have ideas about cool new functionality that we should do a better job of touting, know of large FreeBSD users (I could especially use more pointers to embedded uses of FreeBSD), or otherwise have impressive statistics or benchmarks that we should be getting more leverage out of, please let me know. Thanks! - Murray - Forwarded message from Murray Stokely [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Murray Stokely [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 18:09:32 + (UTC) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/slides/common freebsd-users.xml murray 2004-09-07 18:09:32 UTC FreeBSD doc repository Added files: en_US.ISO8859-1/slides/common freebsd-users.xml Log: Add three slides about users of FreeBSD. * General (large websites, Netcraft numbers, etc..) * FreeBSD in the Banking Industry * FreeBSD used in Internet Infrastructure This could really use a slide about FreeBSD in the high-end embedded market. Revision ChangesPath 1.1 +86 -0 doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/slides/common/freebsd-users.xml (new) - End forwarded message - ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large FreeBSD Users / Impressive Metrics
Possibly of interest for you then, we run around 100 machines providing public and clan based game servers mainly on FreeBSD. A few months back did some benchmarking OS vs OS some of the highlights are here: http://gaming.multiplay.co.uk/stats/server_os_comparison.htm FreeBSD does very well in a number of tests. Steve - Original Message - From: Murray Stokely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 7:35 PM Subject: Large FreeBSD Users / Impressive Metrics I'm working on updating our advocacy material used on the website, in the Handbook, and now in a set of generic slides that can be used or adapted for presentations. If you have ideas about cool new functionality that we should do a better job of touting, know of large FreeBSD users (I could especially use more pointers to embedded uses of FreeBSD), or otherwise have impressive statistics or benchmarks that we should be getting more leverage out of, please let me know. This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large FreeBSD Users / Impressive Metrics
On Tuesday 07 September 2004 02:35 pm, Murray Stokely wrote: I'm working on updating our advocacy material used on the website, in the Handbook, and now in a set of generic slides that can be used or adapted for presentations. If you have ideas about cool new functionality that we should do a better job of touting, know of large FreeBSD users (I could especially use more pointers to embedded uses of FreeBSD), or otherwise have impressive statistics or benchmarks that we should be getting more leverage out of, please let me know. The Weather Channel uses FreeBSD to do realtime audio/video presentation in hundreds of locations across the US serving content to millions of cable and satellite customers in a smart device. (I'm not sure a 4U box really qualifies as embedded, at least via traditional definitions of embedded. :) -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve = http://www.FreeBSD.org ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Booting encrypted
Has any work been done to boot from an encrypted filesystem, or otherwise modify the loader to support GBDE with a compiled-in passphrase? The purpose would be to prevent reverse engineering of an appliance based on FreeBSD. Thoughts, ideas? Thanks! Chris ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Booting encrypted
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write: Has any work been done to boot from an encrypted filesystem, or otherwise modify the loader to support GBDE with a compiled-in passphrase? The purpose would be to prevent reverse engineering of an appliance based on FreeBSD. Thoughts, ideas? Having the password compiled in to something that's necessarily clear-text on the same media? You're not adding anything resembling a challenge for someone who's really interested in reverse-engineering your system. Any user (I won't call such a person *acker) incapable of getting around such a thing probably won't be trying to reverse-engineer it anyhow. -- Steve Watt KD6GGD PP-ASEL-IA ICBM: 121W 56' 57.8 / 37N 20' 14.9 Internet: steve @ Watt.COM Whois: SW32 Free time? There's no such thing. It just comes in varying prices... ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Some SuCon 02 Photos
Hi, You can find some admittedly amateur photos taken at SuCon 2004 here: http://prioris.mini.pw.edu.pl/~zaks/SuCon%202004/ /S ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Booting encrypted
Having the password compiled in to something that's necessarily clear-text on the same media? If the authorization mechanism is limited to plain text, then yes. I know that strings can be used to attempt to find the passphrase in the load, but there may be ways to prevent the passphrase from being retrieved in this manner. You're not adding anything resembling a challenge for someone who's really interested in reverse-engineering your system. Any user (I won't call such a person *acker) incapable of getting around such a thing probably won't be trying to reverse-engineer it anyhow. Well the point is to have a system where the entire filesystem (except the loader of coarse) is encrypted. Runtime access to the system via the shell would be removed or locked down. I wasn't able to find any info about booting encrypted filesystems, but I can't believe I'm the only one that has raised the question. Chris ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Booting encrypted
On Sep 7, 13:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: } Subject: Re: Booting encrypted } } Having the password compiled in to something that's necessarily clear-text } on the same media? } } If the authorization mechanism is limited to plain text, then yes. I know } that strings can be used to attempt to find the passphrase in the load, } but there may be ways to prevent the passphrase from being retrieved in } this manner. It can be a 256-bit AES key for all I care -- it simply must be the key necessary to decrypt the remaining contents of the filesystem available in a way that it can be fed to the crypto algorithm and get plain-text of the filesystem out. And the key must be in plain-text, because you don't have any keys available to decrypt the key... } You're not adding anything resembling a challenge for someone who's really } interested in reverse-engineering your system. Any user (I won't call such } a person *acker) incapable of getting around such a thing probably won't } be trying to reverse-engineer it anyhow. } } Well the point is to have a system where the entire filesystem (except the } loader of coarse) is encrypted. Runtime access to the system via the shell } would be removed or locked down. } } I wasn't able to find any info about booting encrypted filesystems, but I } can't believe I'm the only one that has raised the question. Because it doesn't contribute any security to the system to have the bootable partition encrypted, or else you wind up requiring a password to boot (not necessarily a bad thing, but probably not appropriate for your application). -- Steve Watt KD6GGD PP-ASEL-IA ICBM: 121W 56' 57.8 / 37N 20' 14.9 Internet: steve @ Watt.COM Whois: SW32 Free time? There's no such thing. It just comes in varying prices... ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Booting encrypted
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 01:54:43PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the authorization mechanism is limited to plain text, then yes. I know that strings can be used to attempt to find the passphrase in the load, but there may be ways to prevent the passphrase from being retrieved in this manner. On the other hand, you could use TCPA. Support for the TCPA chips found in many recent IBM machines, particularly the ThinkPad T4x series, was written for NetBSD by the folks at CITI. It's on my wishlist. You could probably teach GDBE about TCPA key retrieval, but the upshot is, you still need to log in to the TCPA chip. However, if you activated TCPA and only allowed it to boot your FreeBSD-derived product OS, by means of their signature mechanism, then you might well achieve your stated aims. BMS ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Large FreeBSD Users / Impressive Metrics
Correct me if I'm wrong but those servers have to run in linux emulation ? If I'm right, that could explain why it can be slower sometimes. Also, do your servers use STABLE or CURRENT ? Steven Hartland said: Possibly of interest for you then, we run around 100 machines providing public and clan based game servers mainly on FreeBSD. A few months back did some benchmarking OS vs OS some of the highlights are here: http://gaming.multiplay.co.uk/stats/server_os_comparison.htm FreeBSD does very well in a number of tests. Steve - Original Message - From: Murray Stokely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 7:35 PM Subject: Large FreeBSD Users / Impressive Metrics I'm working on updating our advocacy material used on the website, in the Handbook, and now in a set of generic slides that can be used or adapted for presentations. If you have ideas about cool new functionality that we should do a better job of touting, know of large FreeBSD users (I could especially use more pointers to embedded uses of FreeBSD), or otherwise have impressive statistics or benchmarks that we should be getting more leverage out of, please let me know. This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Nicolas Bérard Nault ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://staff.xeatech.net/nicobn PGP public key: 0x64159509 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pthread_mutex_trylock and glib-2
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 15:12:08 -0700, Pascal Hofstee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After a few hours of digging through both the glib-2 as well as the beep-media-player sources i finally managed to figure out why beep-media-player apprently crashes on startup when using libpthread, but not when using libc_r. i filed a bugreport against this problem on bugzilla.gnome.org ... in the hope to get some feedback from glib-developers ... http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=152009 The problem is with the actual return value of pthread_mutex_trylock returning EDEADLK instead of EBUSY. from what i have been able to glance from this previous discussion regarding this particular subject (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads/2004-January/001539.html) pthread_mutex_trylock should behave identical to pthread_mutex_lock except return immediately in case of a blocking mutex, which would suggest EDEADLK as a possible return value. This Seems to be the current implementation of both libpthread as well as libthr ... with libc_r being the sole exception. The pthread_mutex_trylock manpage however does not reflect this actual implementation and only mentions EBUSY and EINVAL. I was wondering assuming the implementation is actually correct if this could be rectified in the pthread_mutex_trylock manpage ... and if my assumption is wrong if the implementation could be changed to reflect the manpage. In the former case i will have to bug the glib-devs to change the implementation of their pthread_mutex_trylock wrapper ... to also check for EDEADLK. I am hereby including an updated /usr/ports/devel/glib20/files/patch-gthread_gthread-posix.c that includes the additional check for EDEADLK besides EBUSY in glib's g_mutex_trylock_posix_impl function. With this fix applied to my installation of glib beep-media-player now works as expected with libpthread, and this is very likely to resolve similar behaviour with other ports that try to use glib's threading functions. I CC-ed glib20 port-maintainer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) in the hope this (or appropriate alternative) fix makes it in time for 5.3-RELEASE. -- Pascal Hofstee patch-gthread_gthread-posix.c Description: Binary data ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
