On 2021/05/22 12:06, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Can't find my raspberry pi3 right now. But here is a diff that avoids
> spinning with interrupts disabled while trying to grab the kernel lock
> for it. I'd appreciate it if somebody could give this a spin for me.
> Just checking whether it works
Why would anyone care about that stupid decision?
This function is never going to be deleted from the namespace because
it is critical, and the alternatives offered will continue to be less
portable beyond the lifespan of the people who made that irrelevant
and uneducated decision.
But more to
The man page for the obsolete function getpagesize(3) still lacks
information regarding its removal (and existance) in SUS. This diff
makes this more clear.
Index: lib/libc/gen/getpagesize.3
===
RCS file:
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 02:33:47PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 22 May 2021 11:11:38 +
> > From: Visa Hankala
> >
> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 05:11:09PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > visa@ says I need to unlock softintr_dispatch() before I can
> > > unlock
tech@ & krw (since your code in question was imported to vmd),
I found strange behavior running tcpbench(1) to measure the connection
between a vmd guest and my host, as well as guest-to-guest. In short,
it's some bogus logic in how vmd tries to intercept dhcp/bootp on local
interfaces. Diff at
The new -T option in smtp(1) allows to plug more TLS parameters easily.
For completeness and consistency, this diff adds the following:
cafile=: override the default root certificates
nosni: disable SNI completely
noverify: synonym for -C that can be recycled
servername=: synonym for -S
On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 12:19:37AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> My last change to dsdt.c broke one or two of my cheap little Intel
> "Atom" laptops. Seems my interpretation of the ACPI standard wasn't
> quite right. I went back to the original bug report and I think I
> understand a bit better
Am Sat, May 22, 2021 at 02:33:47PM +0200 schrieb Mark Kettenis:
> > Date: Sat, 22 May 2021 11:11:38 +
> > From: Visa Hankala
> >
> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 05:11:09PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > visa@ says I need to unlock softintr_dispatch() before I can
> > > unlock
> Date: Sat, 22 May 2021 11:11:38 +
> From: Visa Hankala
>
> On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 05:11:09PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > visa@ says I need to unlock softintr_dispatch() before I can
> > unlock softclock(), so let's do that.
> >
> > Additionally, when we call
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 05:11:09PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> visa@ says I need to unlock softintr_dispatch() before I can
> unlock softclock(), so let's do that.
>
> Additionally, when we call softintr_disestablish() we want to wait for
> the underlying softintr handle to finish
Can't find my raspberry pi3 right now. But here is a diff that avoids
spinning with interrupts disabled while trying to grab the kernel lock
for it. I'd appreciate it if somebody could give this a spin for me.
Just checking whether it works normally for a bit would be fine.
Thanks,
Mark
Hi
The grammar for lladdr of interfaces is according to the manpage:
[locked] lladdr [etheraddr]
This implies that `locked lladdr' is OK but looking at parse.y this
does not seem to be the case. Making it optional would lead to a
`lladdr' all by itself being valid, which I find weird. So I
12 matches
Mail list logo