Hello. I'm with Thor. Do what you need to inside the driver itself.
The idea is to make the driver work with the NetBSD kernel, not the NetBSD
kernel work with the driver.
-Brian
On Jan 9, 10:16pm, Brian Buhrow wrote:
} Subject: Re: Equivalent of FreeBSD kernel semaphore?
} hello.
Date:Tue, 10 Jan 2012 03:48:31 + (UTC)
From:chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas)
Message-ID:
Quoting Soren Jacobsen |>
| >My thinking was that we didn't care much if the version number got
| >bumped unless there was an API/ABI change.
It wasn't just when i
hello. When I did the work to get the zaptel drivers running under
NetBSD-5.x, I used condiition variables and mutexes to get the job done.
It was a fairly large mechanical job to get things going, but conceptually,
it was pretty simple, and once I got the basic formats right, everything
r
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 06:41:38AM +0100, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>
> > I am not sure I correctly understand what you mean: is it that we do not
> > have an equivalent of NetBSD's struct sema, and that it would need to be
> > implemented using mutex and condvar?
>
> Loo
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> I am not sure I correctly understand what you mean: is it that we do not
> have an equivalent of NetBSD's struct sema, and that it would need to be
> implemented using mutex and condvar?
Looking at FreeBSD implementation, it seems almost trivial to import it
in our kern
Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Why don't you implement them the same way like FreeBSD did, using a mutex
> and a condition variable?
I am not sure I correctly understand what you mean: is it that we do not
have an equivalent of NetBSD's struct sema, and that it would need to be
implemented using mute
In article <1kdmwvf.163omky1siecjlm%m...@netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>Hello
>
>First problem for porting DADHI drivers: the FreeBSD version uses kernel
>semaphores:
>http://www.unix.com/man-page/FreeBSD/9/sema/
>
>What is the NetBSD equivalent? I know our locks, conditions variables,
>but
In article <20120110014214.ga14...@blef.org>,
Soren Jacobsen wrote:
>On 01/09 19:08, Robert Elz wrote:
>> Could someone who knows please explain the rules for the construction
>> of __NetBSD_Version__ for releases, what the sub-fields are, and how
>> they're actually used - and then perhaps actua
hi,
> Hi,
>
> I would like to change upreempt_pri to default to 0 as this makes
> wakeups where the interrupted cpu schedules a thread on another cpu
> behave like as if it where scheduled on the interrupted cpu.
>
> For the case that the to be scheduled on cpu is the interrupted one,
> the
Hello
First problem for porting DADHI drivers: the FreeBSD version uses kernel
semaphores:
http://www.unix.com/man-page/FreeBSD/9/sema/
What is the NetBSD equivalent? I know our locks, conditions variables,
but what about semaphores?
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.or
On 01/09 19:08, Robert Elz wrote:
> Could someone who knows please explain the rules for the construction
> of __NetBSD_Version__ for releases, what the sub-fields are, and how
> they're actually used - and then perhaps actually put that information
> into param.h ?
Well, I've made all of the 5.x
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 10:14:45AM -0800, John Nemeth wrote:
> }
> } Have you realized that these drivers are apparently GPL/LGPL and thus
> } not suitable for NetBSD kernel inclusion?
>
> There is no problem with creating a module and sticking it in
> pkgsrc.
If the drivers are LGPL, what
On Jun 1, 3:02am, Marc Balmer wrote:
} Am 09.01.2012 03:06, schrieb Emmanuel Dreyfus:
} > Hello everybody
} >
} > PCI boards for Asterisk require kernel drivers, which used to be
} > provided by the now obsolete and retired zaptel package. We now need
} > DADHI drivers, which have a FreeBSD port h
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
>> > Here're updated patches. Tested on sparc (build only). Gnats ID is
>> > lib/45796.
>>
>> Looks like a lot of replicated code from elsewhere in libsa.
>> You really ought to manage to factor out a lot of the common bits.
>
> Can you mention
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 07:08:44PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> ps: I'd still like to see __NetBSD_Prereq__() macro destroyed.
so would I.
--
David A. Holland
dholl...@netbsd.org
I don't understand how __NetBSD_Version__ is supposed to operate
(other than the way it is used in -current - that part is no
mystery) - that is, how it is used in NetBSD releases.
The documentation (which as far as I can ascertain is just what
is in src/sys/sys/param.h) no longer seems to match c
Am 09.01.12 09:13, schrieb Emmanuel Dreyfus:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 08:27:04AM +0100, Marc Balmer wrote:
>> Have you realized that these drivers are apparently GPL/LGPL and
>> thus not suitable for NetBSD kernel inclusion?
>
> Don't we have LKM and pkgsrc just for that?
LKM with the module in
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 08:27:04AM +0100, Marc Balmer wrote:
> Have you realized that these drivers are apparently GPL/LGPL and
> thus not suitable for NetBSD kernel inclusion?
Don't we have LKM and pkgsrc just for that?
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
m...@netbsd.org
18 matches
Mail list logo
