Log Message:
pciioctl(), pci_devioctl():
simplify implementations of PCI_IOC_BDF_CFGREAD, PCI_IOC_BDF_CFGWRITE,
PCI_IOC_CFGREAD, PCI_IOC_CFGWRITE
No functional changes.
:
I will try
memset(tag, 0, sizeof(tag));
in the default case and buildtest several kernel configs for
In article
090708000205.m0124267__27136.7730493241$1246978986$gmane$...@mirage.ceres.dti.ne.jp,
Izumi Tsutsui tsut...@ceres.dti.ne.jp wrote:
Log Message:
pciioctl(), pci_devioctl():
simplify implementations of PCI_IOC_BDF_CFGREAD, PCI_IOC_BDF_CFGWRITE,
PCI_IOC_CFGREAD, PCI_IOC_CFGWRITE
p...@whooppee.com said:
I guess maybe the minus signs shouldn't ever happen?
someone out here with a liquid nitrogen cooler?
best regards
Matthias
given that this issue is appearing on both ipmi and coretemp, and the
fact that coretemp doesn't even bother with hi/low limits, it's probably
something in envsys itself.
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Matthias Drochner wrote:
p...@whooppee.com said:
I guess maybe the minus signs shouldn't ever
David Young dyo...@pobox.com wrote:
It seems that pmf_event_inject() is called from interrupt context, from
which kmem(9) cannot be used. You probably want to use pool_cache(9), or
perhaps avoid allocations at all (since they are not intensive).
Are you planning to fix it? It
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 01:26:13PM -0500, David Young wrote:
How is this for a fix? I haven't run-tested this, yet.
Wouldn't a pool serve the same purpose with less code?
Joerg
Christos Zoulas wrote:
Module Name: src
Committed By: christos
Date: Tue Jul 7 17:08:20 UTC 2009
Modified Files:
src/sys/dev/pci: pci_usrreq.c
Log Message:
simplify previous.
Thanks for fixing it.
(The crossbuild test with my proposed fix actually worked though.
It
On Jul 7, 11:13pm, christoph_eg...@gmx.de (Christoph Egger) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/dev/pci
| Thanks for fixing it.
|
| (The crossbuild test with my proposed fix actually worked though.
| It just finished.)
No problem, I just thought that simplifying the code further and not
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 10:47:51PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 01:26:13PM -0500, David Young wrote:
How is this for a fix? I haven't run-tested this, yet.
Wouldn't a pool serve the same purpose with less code?
I don't see why not. See attachment.
Dave
--
