Could someone please take a look at bug 267671 [1]?
Numerous 'printf to stderr' make it difficult to read terminal output
important for ports like graphics/qgis ...
Thanks for an assessment!
Regards,
Rainer Hurling
[1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=267671
# ls -l, *
/usr/main-src/lib/libc/stdio/fread.c:133:10: runtime error: applying zero
offset to null pointer
SUMMARY: UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer: undefined-behavior
/usr/main-src/lib/libc/stdio/fread.c:133:10 in
==47404==AddressSanitizer: WARNING: unexpected format specifier in printf
ifier
> 'b' [-Werror,-Wformat-invalid-specifier]
>printf("%s%d: quirks=0x%b\n", periph->periph_name,
> ~^
> /usr/home/luigi/FreeBSD/head/sys/cam/cam_xpt.c:1070:36: error: data argument
> not used
-specifier]
printf("%s%d: quirks=0x%b\n", periph->periph_name,
~^
/usr/home/luigi/FreeBSD/head/sys/cam/cam_xpt.c:1070:36: error: data argument
not used by
format string [-Werror,-Wformat-extra-args]
periph->unit_number,
John Baldwin writes:
> I think DES has a newer variant of this now?
Committed, along with an additional patch that warns you if you
configure more swap than the pager can handle.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org
2012 8:23:31 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>> >>> Hey,
>> >>>
>> >>> hitting this printf in swp_pager_meta_build()
>> >>>
>> >>>if (uma_zone_exhausted(swap_zone)) {
>> >>>
On Monday, August 13, 2012 1:49:38 am Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
> On 2 July 2012 20:31, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> >
> > On 2. Jul 2012, at 14:36 , John Baldwin wrote:
> >
> >> On Sunday, July 01, 2012 8:23:31 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> >>> Hey,
> >>
Sergey Kandaurov writes:
> What about this patch? It enables to ratelimit the printf.
I have a different patch that just prints one message when swzone is
exhausted and another when more space becomes available. However, we
might want to combine the two, so that it periodically prints a mess
On 2 July 2012 20:31, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>
> On 2. Jul 2012, at 14:36 , John Baldwin wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, July 01, 2012 8:23:31 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> hitting this printf in swp_pager_meta_build()
>>>
>>
On 2. Jul 2012, at 14:36 , John Baldwin wrote:
> On Sunday, July 01, 2012 8:23:31 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> hitting this printf in swp_pager_meta_build()
>>
>>if (uma_zone_exhausted(swap_zone)) {
>>
On Sunday, July 01, 2012 8:23:31 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> Hey,
>
> hitting this printf in swp_pager_meta_build()
>
> if (uma_zone_exhausted(swap_zone)) {
> printf("swap zone exhausted, incre
Hey,
hitting this printf in swp_pager_meta_build()
if (uma_zone_exhausted(swap_zone)) {
printf("swap zone exhausted, increase
kern.maxswzone\n");
vm_pageout_oom(VM
ted == cpu_new_callout):
callout -> et_hw_mtx
o Eventtimers' doconfigtimer calls loadtimer with et_hw_mtx held, loadtimer
calls et_start method of a configured event timer and, e.g. in the case of
lapic_et_start and bootverbose it calls printf(9), which gives:
et_hw_mtx -> scrlock
This is just for t
on 23/01/2012 15:04 Gleb Smirnoff said the following:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 07:26:55PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> A> > BTW, we have a quite strange situation with spin locks in console output
> path.
> A> > cnputs_mtx is marked as MTX_NOWITNESS, supposedly because c
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 07:26:55PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
A> > BTW, we have a quite strange situation with spin locks in console output
path.
A> > cnputs_mtx is marked as MTX_NOWITNESS, supposedly because cnputs (printf)
can be
A> > called in any locking context (even durin
on 21/01/2012 16:37 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>
> BTW, we have a quite strange situation with spin locks in console output path.
> cnputs_mtx is marked as MTX_NOWITNESS, supposedly because cnputs (printf) can
> be
> called in any locking context (even during normal operati
BTW, we have a quite strange situation with spin locks in console output path.
cnputs_mtx is marked as MTX_NOWITNESS, supposedly because cnputs (printf) can be
called in any locking context (even during normal operation). But there are a
number of console-specific locks (scrlock, uart_hwmtx
After getting in contact with clang's ml, the determined that this a bug in
clang's format checker.
Note that this bug affects:
printf("%hu\n", ntohs(x));
This happens in 9 that ntohs is defined as a macro using conditinal operator
(? :)
The disc
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Anonymous wrote:
> A few examples from ports tree
>
> devel/automake111: automake-1.11(1)
> devel/gettext: dcgettext(3), dcngettext(3), dgettext(3), dngettext(3)
> devel/nasm: rdf2com(1), rdf2ihx(1), rdf2ith(1), rdf2srec(1)
> textproc/gnugrep: egrep(1), fgrep(1)
A few examples from ports tree
devel/automake111: automake-1.11(1)
devel/gettext: dcgettext(3), dcngettext(3), dgettext(3), dngettext(3)
devel/nasm: rdf2com(1), rdf2ihx(1), rdf2ith(1), rdf2srec(1)
textproc/gnugrep: egrep(1), fgrep(1)
www/neon29: ne_get_{request,session}_flag(3), ne_set_c
Sep 9 00:21:57 2003
> @@ -297,12 +297,11 @@
> printf(" -- Insufficient hz, needs at least
> %u\n", u);
Hmm. this clause already had its own newline.
> }
> } else if (tc->tc_quality >= 0 || bootverbose) {
> - print
/kern/kern_tc.c:
$FreeBSD: src/sys/kern/kern_tc.c,v 1.157 2003/09/03 08:14:16 phk Exp $
--- sys/kern/kern_tc.c.org Tue Sep 9 00:21:30 2003
+++ sys/kern/kern_tc.c Tue Sep 9 00:21:57 2003
@@ -297,12 +297,11 @@
printf(" -- Insufficient hz, needs at least
%u\
Hi,
First of all, Thanks to all of you for your help and support.
I have tried to go deeper and deeper to find out how "printf" works. ((( Of
course the aim of trying to understand the "printf", is to understand how
the internals of the BSD kernel work))) till i've fac
On 2003-02-08 16:23, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave
> On Saturday, February 8, 2003, at 04:12 PM, Auge Mike wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I was trying to know how "printf" works in FreeBSD... I hvae
> >reached to this point :
>
On Saturday 08 February 2003 22:12, Auge Mike wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was trying to know how "printf" works in FreeBSD... I hvae reached to
> this point :
>
> #define _write(fd, s, n) \
> __syscall(SYS_write, (int)(fd), (const void *)(s), (size_t)(n))
>
>
"Auge Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I was trying to know how "printf" works in FreeBSD... I hvae reached
> to this point :
>
> #define _write(fd, s, n) \
> __syscall(SYS_write, (int)(fd), (const void *)(s), (size_t)(n))
if your program runs
>I was trying to know how "printf" works in FreeBSD... I hvae reached
>to this
>point :
>
>#define _write(fd, s, n) \
> __syscall(SYS_write, (int)(fd), (const void *)(s), (size_t)(n))
>
>I'am not really familiar with the way FreeBSD handle interrupts
On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 16:23:21 -0600
David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Howdy.
> Isn't it ultimately interrupt 08 on the PC with an index in the EAX
> register for the write "subroutine"?
>
> I am pretty sure that's correct. I might have the interrupt value
> wrong though.
s/08/0x80/ :-)
s trying to know how "printf" works in FreeBSD... I hvae reached
to this
point :
#define _write(fd, s, n) \
__syscall(SYS_write, (int)(fd), (const void *)(s), (size_t)(n))
I'am not really familiar with the way FreeBSD handle interrupts. I
like from
any one of you to tell me what f
Hi all,
I was trying to know how "printf" works in FreeBSD... I hvae reached to this
point :
#define _write(fd, s, n) \
__syscall(SYS_write, (int)(fd), (const void *)(s), (size_t)(n))
I'am not really familiar with the way FreeBSD handle interrupts. I like from
any one of
On 21-Jan-2003 Nate Lawson wrote:
> How is this?
>
> --- acpi_cpu.c 16 Oct 2002 17:28:52 - 1.14
> +++ acpi_cpu.c 21 Jan 2003 06:07:43 -
> @@ -295,8 +295,10 @@
> /* set initial speed */
> acpi_cpu_power_profile(NULL);
>
> -print
In the last episode (Jan 21), Terry Lambert said:
> I think that changing the order from "100% to 10%" to "10% to 100%"
> will, if people ignore the second printed line, imply that there was
> a transition from 10% to 100%, rather than the reverse (that was my
> response to the patch).
Or better y
Daniel Holmes wrote:
> > +printf("acpi_cpu: throttling enabled, %d steps from 100%% to %d.%d%%, "
> > + "currently %d.%d%%\n"
>
> Personally, rather than 'enabled', how about 'available'? Using the
> word enabled might gi
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Daniel Holmes wrote:
> > +printf("acpi_cpu: throttling enabled, %d steps from 100%% to %d.%d%%, "
> > + "currently %d.%d%%\n"
>
> Personally, rather than 'enabled', how about 'available'? Using the
&g
> + printf("acpi_cpu: throttling enabled, %d steps from 100%% to %d.%d%%, "
> + "currently %d.%d%%\n"
Personally, rather than 'enabled', how about 'available'? Using the
word enabled might give some newbies fits when they try to f
Nate Lawson wrote:
> How is this?
[ ... less alarming throttling message ... ]
I like it. I don't know if it's redundant with the "currently ..."
thing, but I'd like to see it:
+printf("acpi_cpu: throttling enabled, %d steps from %d.%d%% to 100%%, "
How is this?
--- acpi_cpu.c 16 Oct 2002 17:28:52 - 1.14
+++ acpi_cpu.c 21 Jan 2003 06:07:43 -
@@ -295,8 +295,10 @@
/* set initial speed */
acpi_cpu_power_profile(NULL);
-printf("acpi_cpu: CPU throttling enabled, %d steps from 100%% to %d.%
Ok, since my last request went so well, lets try again:
Adrians patch for the rlimit file in procfs revealed that
the kernel printf doesn't support 64 bit integers on i386.
Anyone care to try their hands on that little detail ?
--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam mem
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >> >@@ -1016,7 +1019,10 @@
> >> > flags |= SHORTINT;
> >> > goto rflag;
> >> > case 'l':
> >> >- flags |= LONGINT;
> >> >+ if (flags & LONGINT)
> >> >+ flags
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >> >@@ -1016,7 +1019,10 @@
> >> > flags |= SHORTINT;
> >> > goto rflag;
> >> > case 'l':
> >> >- flags |= LONGINT;
> >> >+ if (flags & LONGINT)
> >> >+ flags
>> >@@ -1016,7 +1019,10 @@
>> >flags |= SHORTINT;
>> >goto rflag;
>> >case 'l':
>> >- flags |= LONGINT;
>> >+ if (flags & LONGINT)
>> >+ flags |= QUADINT;
>> >+ else
>
On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >I want to make this change to printf so that it treats format codes like
> >'%llx' as 64bit formats (i.e. the same as '%qx'). This convention is the
> >same as that used by glibc.
>
> %llx is actually for
>I want to make this change to printf so that it treats format codes like
>'%llx' as 64bit formats (i.e. the same as '%qx'). This convention is the
>same as that used by glibc.
%llx is actually for unsigned long longs, and %qx is actually for
u_quad_t's. The
I want to make this change to printf so that it treats format codes like
'%llx' as 64bit formats (i.e. the same as '%qx'). This convention is the
same as that used by glibc.
I needed this change to make an i386->alpha cross debugger which worked
properly but I think that
44 matches
Mail list logo
