have softraid crypto call crypto_dispatch appropriately instead of crypto_invoke

the distinct impression i get is crypto_invoke is an internal abstraction to src/sys/crypto/crypto.c. it isnt documented in crypto(9), and is only used outside crypto by softraid. softraid should be calling crypto_dispatch with CRYPTO_F_NOQUEUE set if it wants/needs those semantics. can a softraid

let crypto.c pools protect themselves

pools lock themselves, we just gotta tell them how hard. can someone test this with ipsec or softraid crypto? or ok it? Index: crypto.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/crypto/crypto.c,v retrieving revision 1.68 diff -u -p -r1.68 crypto.c

use M_ZERO and PR_ZERO in crypto.c instead of bzero after allocation

ok? Index: crypto.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/crypto/crypto.c,v retrieving revision 1.67 diff -u -p -r1.67 crypto.c --- crypto.c14 Sep 2014 14:17:23 - 1.67 +++ crypto.c20 Oct 2014 00:26:56 - @@ -220,15 +220,12 @@

make IPL levels consistent in src/sys/crypto/crypto.c

everything else in crypto is protected at IPL_VM (via splvm), i cant see a reason for the taskq to be different. ive read all the users of the crypto api and theyre all at or below IPL_VM. can someone test this with ipsec or softraid crypto? cheers, dlg Index: crypto.c ==

OpenSSL errata Oct 20

Patches are now available to fix two remotely triggerable memory leaks in the OpenSSL libssl library. This issue affects 5.4 and 5.5. These issues were originally fixed in forthcoming 5.6 release (it's not affected). The patch for 5.5 follows. untrusted comment: signature from openbsd 5.5 base se

Re: em(4) fix for Intel I218 chip

spotted a small typo in a comment. 1Gpbs -> 1Gbps On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:53:28PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > This seems to be enough to help em(4) in modern laptops like the X240 to > no longer generate watchdog timeouts on high throughput. > This should only affect I218 but tests on differe

kernexec errata Oct 20

Patches are now available to fix a localhost kernel crash reported by Alejandro Hernandez. This issue affects 5.4, 5.5, and the forthcoming 5.6 release. The patch for 5.5 follows. untrusted comment: signature from openbsd 5.5 base secret key RWRGy8gxk9N93+CyZ3HPzmlkYc+DX80XHguS4MVaRRRK53ZyfwuOFKv

amd64/i386 bus_space uvm_km_valloc -> km_alloc

ok? Index: i386/i386/machdep.c === RCS file: /home/cvs/src/sys/arch/i386/i386/machdep.c,v retrieving revision 1.555 diff -u -p -r1.555 machdep.c --- i386/i386/machdep.c 17 Oct 2014 20:37:57 - 1.555 +++ i386/i386/machdep.c 19

info for htc hermes 300

Hallo everyone, i want install OpenBSD into pocket pc phone htc tytn hermes 300, but i don´t find the good information for unlock the bootloader and info for firmware free fot this hardware. http://microcontrollershop.com/product_info.php?products_id=3945 this is the mainboard the cpu is S3C2

fix ulpt(4) firmware loading error path

After submitting a print job and then turning on my USB printer I got: ulpt0 at uhub0 port 1 configuration 1 interface 0 "Hewlett-Packard HP LaserJet 1020" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 2 ulpt0: using bi-directional mode ulpt0: ucode upload error=IOERROR! ulpt0: could not load firmware 'ulpt-hp1020' uvm_fau

Re: getent(1) hosts enumeration defunc

Hi Theo, Theo de Raadt wrote on Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 07:35:06AM -0600: > Florian Obser wrote: >> You can get rid of sethostent(3)/endhostent(3) at the same time. > Those have to remain stubs for a while longer, because there are > ports which poke at them. Oh the joys of terseness. Florian mea

Re: getent(1) hosts enumeration defunc

>You can get rid of sethostent(3)/endhostent(3) at the same time. Those have to remain stubs for a while longer, because there are ports which poke at them.

Re: uuidgen port from FreeBSD for inclusion in OpenBSD base

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:01:17PM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: > > Why do you post publicly a private mail without asking first? > > Looks like my first impression about you was right. Don't feed the troll

Re: Conditional include in make(1)

> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 09:25:51 +0200 > From: Matthieu Herrb > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 08:14:16PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > > > Is there a reason why conditional includes (sinclude/-include) aren't > > enabled in OpenBSD? > > > > I'm asking because the Xorg people now use

Re: getent(1) hosts enumeration defunc

Hi Ingo, On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 02:24:27AM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > Hi Philip, > > Philip Guenther wrote on Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 04:38:09PM -0700: > > > Maybe we just fix getent(1) to return an error like it does for ethers? > > Whatever we do with gethostent(3) - maybe it's really expend

Re: Conditional include in make(1)

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 09:25:51AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 08:14:16PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > > > Is there a reason why conditional includes (sinclude/-include) aren't > > enabled in OpenBSD? > > > > I'm asking because the Xorg people now use it

Re: Conditional include in make(1)

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 08:14:16PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Hi Marc, > > Is there a reason why conditional includes (sinclude/-include) aren't > enabled in OpenBSD? > > I'm asking because the Xorg people now use it in one of the xserver > Makefile. We could of course try to convince them to