On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 6:03 AM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Adam will correct me if I'm wrong, but his idea was to provide clock
> > emulation to the operating system running in userland (solo5/unikernel).
> > Perhaps vmd can make use of this interface too.
>
> But why does it matter if it knows the
> Adam will correct me if I'm wrong, but his idea was to provide clock
> emulation to the operating system running in userland (solo5/unikernel).
> Perhaps vmd can make use of this interface too.
But why does it matter if it knows the frequency?
On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 17:23 +, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > Now that we have an accurate tsc frequency, I would like to expose this
> > > > information to userland via a sysctl.
> > > >
> > > > The diff below exposes the tsc frequency and if it is invariant.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Ad
> > > Now that we have an accurate tsc frequency, I would like to expose this
> > > information to userland via a sysctl.
> > >
> > > The diff below exposes the tsc frequency and if it is invariant.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Adam
> > >
> > >
> > Please ignore that diff, looks like i had some dregs
On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 10:27 +, Adam Steen wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Adam Steen wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 03:58:18PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > An experimental change to use TSC as a timecounter source on a variety
> > > of modern Intel and A
Hi,
I think I found a bug/inconsistency/regression in ctan(3) introduced
somewhere after 6.1 release. Originally observed in math/R
(https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=150728711530471&w=2) the behavior can be
reproduced with following C program:
--8<-
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 04:06:15PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I have been bumping into maxproc limits a lot recently on my
> workstation. While I do have quite a lot of processes at times, I don't
> think I have quite been tripping into the limits of number of actual
> processes.
>
> It seem
On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 06:27:53PM +0800, Adam Steen wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Adam Steen wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 03:58:18PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > An experimental change to use TSC as a timecounter source on a variety
> > > of modern Intel
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Adam Steen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 03:58:18PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > An experimental change to use TSC as a timecounter source on a variety
> > of modern Intel and AMD CPUs has been just committed and enabled on
> > OpenBSD/amd64 than
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 03:58:18PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> An experimental change to use TSC as a timecounter source on a variety
> of modern Intel and AMD CPUs has been just committed and enabled on
> OpenBSD/amd64 thanks to the work done by Adam Steen.
>
> The rationale is, quoti
Our ld hasn't generated __plt_{start,end} symbols for over a year, back in
6.0, so it's time to kill support for them in ld.so.
(Where it matters, the need for the writable PLT is handled by
a) marking it RWE which is automatically mapped as RW and then
mprotect()ed to RX after relocation
On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 01:15:40AM +, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > See my updated diff for reusing the gopi struct, please.
>
> ok, but the diff seems to be against wrong revision. You seems to
> have other diffs, moving gop and gopi to global at least.
>
> Can you send it entirely?
Hi,
what was the cause of these delays? i just spotted this, so untested on
likely more affected HW(sunxi A64/H3 and rockchips), but just for discussion
about the delays/ordering? are they really needed like that?
i don't remember having read anything about the order of these from
devicetree-bin
13 matches
Mail list logo