On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 01:58:59PM -0400, Brad Smith wrote:
> On 31/12/13 12:06 AM, Brad Smith wrote:
> >On 16/05/13 5:55 PM, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I've been using msk(4) with MSI on my laptop since a few days, with no
> >>apparent problem.
> >>
> >>mskc0 at pci2 dev 0 fu
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 10:01:59PM +, Alexey Suslikov wrote:
> SASANO Takayoshi mx5.nisiq.net> writes:
>
> > > Try this[1] kernel and have a look if it has the same issue or not.
> >
> > Kernel did not started... U-Boot says checksum is ok, so maybe
> > .umg file is not corrupted.
>
> When
SASANO Takayoshi mx5.nisiq.net> writes:
> > Try this[1] kernel and have a look if it has the same issue or not.
>
> Kernel did not started... U-Boot says checksum is ok, so maybe
> .umg file is not corrupted.
When using
OpenBSD 5.6 (RAMDISK-SUNXI) #3: Sun Aug 31 18:46:49 EDT 2014
could you dr
Hi,
> Try this[1] kernel and have a look if it has the same issue or not.
Kernel did not started... U-Boot says checksum is ok, so maybe
.umg file is not corrupted.
Regards,
--
SASANO Takayoshi
U-Boot SPL 2014.04-10694-g2ae8b32-dirty (Oct 01 2014 - 17:40:04)
Board: Bananapi
DRAM: 1024 MiB
C
iirc this is the core of the issue: The L1 Section descriptors access
permissions are still the old ones, not the v7 versions.
arm/include/pmap.h:
#define L1_S_PROT_U (L1_S_AP(AP_U))
#define L1_S_PROT_W (L1_S_AP(AP_W))
#define L1_S_PROT_MASK (L1_S_PROT_U|L1_S_PROT
Hi,
I remember that there has been an issue, only seen on Cortex-A7/A15, like the
Allwinner A20.
The fix for that issue is somewhere here[0].
Try this[1] kernel and have a look if it has the same issue or not.
I do not have an A20, so I can’t test it, sorry. But I’ll probably buy
this[2][3] o
Hello,
I tried bsd.rd.SUNXI.umg snapshot on Banana Pi, cheap Allwinner A20
board like Raspberry Pi (see http://www.lemaker.org/).
It booted but something wrong. Arch Linux (for Banana Pi) works fine
so I think the board is not broken.
This is my first OpenBSD/armv7 experience and I don't know w
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 12:20:14PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Our USB stack contains a hack needed for ehci(4) and ohci(4) that
> breaks xhci(4). The diff below moves this hack in these drivers,
> and makes it possible to have a working xhci(4) in GENERIC.
>
> I'd like this diff to be teste
To correct the instructions slightly...
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
...
> # Build new boot(8)
> cd ../../stand/boot
> make install
Change that last line to
make obj && make depend && make && make install
> # Install new boot(8)
> cp /usr/mdec/boot /bo
Hi all,
From my work on running OpenBSD under OpenBIOS/QEMU, I found a couple
of bugs in the NetBSD OF bindings for SPARC64 which also seem to be
relevant to OpenBSD. I've applied patches to OpenBIOS to compensate for
these bugs which allows OpenBSD to boot under QEMU, but thought that as
the
On 01/10/14(Wed) 21:54, Rafael Zalamena wrote:
> This new diff aims to simplify the mpe(4) device and also to improve
> the old code that handled the installation of MPLS interface routes.
>
> I followed what mpi@ said:
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:00:25AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Hell
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 05:58:43AM -0500, Vladimir Támara Patiño wrote:
> POSIX doesn't specify behavior for wcsrtombs and mbsrtowcs when the
> source parameter is NULL.
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/mbsrtowcs.html
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functi
POSIX doesn't specify behavior for wcsrtombs and mbsrtowcs when the
source parameter is NULL.
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/mbsrtowcs.html
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/wcsrtombs.html
However segfaulting in such cases, as happens with this exam
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 10:31:04AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Most of the local routes added on a system contain the link-layer
> address of the interface they are attached too. It is like that
> because these routes must be compatible with the cloned routes for
> ARP or ND.
>
> But for loop
Our USB stack contains a hack needed for ehci(4) and ohci(4) that
breaks xhci(4). The diff below moves this hack in these drivers,
and makes it possible to have a working xhci(4) in GENERIC.
I'd like this diff to be tested on as much machines as possible, because
the code path it touches is very
Most of the local routes added on a system contain the link-layer
address of the interface they are attached too. It is like that
because these routes must be compatible with the cloned routes for
ARP or ND.
But for loopback or point-to-point interfaces it is different since
the 'gateway' of such
16 matches
Mail list logo