On Nov 17, 10:46am, lourival.n...@gmail.com (Lourival Vieira Neto) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t
| On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Marc Balmer wrote:
| > Am 17.11.13 04:49, schrieb Terry Moore:
| >> I believe that if you want the Lua scripts to be portable across
On Nov 17, 10:36am, lourival.n...@gmail.com (Lourival Vieira Neto) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t
| I mean know it as a script programmer. I think that would be helpful
| to know the exact lua_Number width when you are writing a script.
| AFAIK, you don't have sizeo
On Nov 17, 1:15pm, k...@munnari.oz.au (Robert Elz) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: posix_fallocate
| ps: I have not examined the FreeBSD implementation - if they've done it the
| hard, safe, way, and worked out all the potential kinks, and if it doesn't
| depend too much upon other aspects of their I/O sy
On Nov 17, 1:36am, lourival.n...@gmail.com (Lourival Vieira Neto) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t
| > Bigger is better. And you can use %jd to print which is a big win.
|
| I agree that bigger is better and %jd is much better then "%" PRI/SCN.
| But don't you think
In article <1lcgiu4.18zr2h51aac07zm%m...@netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>Hi
>
>NetBSD-current seems to lack posix_fallocate(2)
>http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695299/functions/posix_fallocate
>.html
>
>Is someone already working on it, or has thoughs about how it should be
>implemen
On Nov 16, 9:30pm, lourival.n...@gmail.com (Lourival Vieira Neto) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t
| On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > In article <52872b0c.5080...@msys.ch>, Marc Balmer wrote:
| >>Changing the number typ
In article <201311160540.aaa23...@chip.rodents-montreal.org>,
Mouse wrote:
>The documentation I have (which is consistent across 1.4T, 4.0.1, and
>5.2) says that "[a] file I/O operation that would create a file larger
>that the process' soft limit will cause the write to fail and a signal
>SIGXFS
In article <52872b0c.5080...@msys.ch>, Marc Balmer wrote:
>Changing the number type to int64_t is certainly a good idea. Two
>questions, however:
Why not intmax_t?
christos
In article <20131105220754.gb...@snowdrop.l8s.co.uk>,
David Laight wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 04:35:19PM -0800, John Nemeth wrote:
>>
>> It has to do with the fact that historically mkdir(2) was
>> actually mkdir(3), it wasn't an atomic syscall and was a sequence
>> of operation perfor
In article <20131105144023.gc17...@mail.duskware.de>,
Martin Husemann wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Hey folks,
>
>I would like to change the current (mostly) compile time decision
>wether we will use top-down VA layout for userland processes to a
>runtime check.
>
>This allows emulations to disable it,
In article <20131022205705.c0dc812...@ren.fdy2.co.uk>,
Robert Swindells wrote:
>
>Can somebody explain how the deferred processing code in subr_autoconf.c
>is supposed to work ?
>
>Looking at config_create_interruptthreads() it creates 8 threads all
>of which seem to walk the same list and delete
On Oct 6, 10:51pm, nj...@pasteur.fr (Nicolas Joly) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: mknodat(2) device argument type change
| On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 05:56:58PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > In article <20131006174052.ga27...@lynche.sis.pasteur.fr>,
| > Nicolas Joly wrote:
|
In article <20131006174052.ga27...@lynche.sis.pasteur.fr>,
Nicolas Joly wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>Checking syscalls.master mknodat(2) definition needs to be updated for
>correct device argument type. It currently use uint32_t where it
>should be dev_t ...
>
>460 STD RUMP { int|sys||mknodat(int
On Sep 19, 11:35am, buh...@nfbcal.org (Brian Buhrow) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| Hello. the worst case scenario is when a raid set is running in
| degraded mode. Greg sent me some notes on how to calculate the memory
| utilization in this instance. I'll go dig them o
In article <523aab61.8000...@gmail.com>,
Jan Danielsson wrote:
>On 9/18/13 7:00 PM, Jan Danielsson wrote:
>>I'm trying to get kgdb working between two virtual box instances. (I
>> have verified that /dev/tty00 <-> /dev/tty00 works by running GENERIC
>> kernels and minicom on both virtual mach
On Sep 19, 6:41pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| Greg Oster wrote:
|
| > > sysctl to the rescue.
| >
| > The appropriate 'bit to twiddle' is likely raidPtr->openings.
| > Increasing the value can be done while holding raidPtr->mutex.
| > D
On Sep 19, 8:13am, t...@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:03:11PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
| > Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
| >
| > > Thank you for saving my day. But now what happens?
| > > I note the SATA disks are in
On Sep 18, 3:34am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > On large filesystems with many files fsck can take a really long time after
| > a crash. In my personal experience power outages are much less frequen
On Sep 17, 5:38pm, buh...@nfbcal.org (Brian Buhrow) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| hello. How do you move the wapbl log to a drive other than the one
| on which the filesystem that's being logged is runing? In other words, I
| thought the log existed on the same media
On Sep 18, 2:22am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| > The case to worry about is the scenario where the machine
| > suddently loses power, the data never makes it to the physical media,
| > and gets lost from the cache. In this case you might en
On Sep 17, 9:48pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: high load, no bottleneck
| Excellent: the load does not go over 2 now (compared to 50).
|
| Thank you for saving my day. But now what happens?
| I note the SATA disks are in IDE emulation mode, and not AHCI. This is
| s
In article <1l9czcn.y6kr35aruvzvm%m...@netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>
>> db{0}> show vnode c5a24b08
>> OBJECT 0xc5a24b08: locked=0, pgops=0xc0b185a8, npages=1720, refs=16
>>
>> VNODE flags 0x4030
>> mp 0xc4a14000 numoutput 0 size 0x6f writesize 0x6f
>> da
In article <20130731222303.gj96...@trav.math.uni-bonn.de>,
Edgar Fuß wrote:
>> Yes, I believe you are right. Return an error for all errors.
>Any idea what the intent of only catching EINTR was?
The flawed logic of:
If the write fails for any other reason than being unterrupted
by the u
In article <20130730211200.gd96...@trav.math.uni-bonn.de>,
Edgar Fuß wrote:
>> I think the problem is in nfs_setattr(), sys/nfs/nfs_vnops.c:681,
>> where files are flushed before setattr "because a later write of
>> cached data might change timestamps or reset sugid bits", but the
>> only return
In article <51c9db37.1090...@netbsd.org>, Jeff Rizzo wrote:
>The last time sys/compat/ibcs2/syscalls.master was edited [1] (July
>2010), the dependent files were not regenerated. There was at least one
>typo (fixed), but there are also duplicate syscall names, which cause
>the generated files
On Jun 25, 9:32am, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: DTrace syscall provider - please test/comment
|
| On Jun 25, 2013, at 5:25 AM, chris...@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas) wrote:
|
| > On Jun 24, 6:12pm, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
| > -- Subje
On Jun 24, 6:12pm, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: DTrace syscall provider - please test/comment
|
| On Jun 24, 2013, at 6:01 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > Can't this be done as an addition/enhancement to the trace_enter()/
| > trace_exit() facility
In article <51c8d0f5.9020...@netbsd.org>, Jeff Rizzo wrote:
>I've been looking at our DTrace code in my spare time recently, and I'd
>like to get us closer to the point where generally available D scripts
>"just work" on NetBSD. One of the big missing pieces right now (by no
>means the *only*
In article <20130621214939.4013614a...@mail.netbsd.org>,
Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
>David Holland wrote:
>> In the short term, to reduce the confusion I would like to make the
>> following changes:
>>
>>1. Rename v_mount, which is the filesystem the vnode is on (almost
>>always / f
In article ,
Tomas Niño Kehoe wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Hi all,
>
>I'd like to announce the existence of a NetBSD port to the AVR32 processor
>architecture.
>This port is being developed in the context of my engineering thesis at the
>University of Buenos Aires, Argentina. It is directed by Leandro
On Mar 29, 2:18pm, y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
-- Subject: maxlwp
| hi,
|
| i have some questions about maxlwp stuff.
|
| - unlike kern.maxproc which restricts the total number of processes in
| a system, kern.maxlwp's sole purpose is to restrict setrlimit. is it right?
| i
In article ,
Paul Goyette wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Currently, even though it is conditionalized on COMPAT_50, boottime50
>(and the related kern.oboottime sysctl variable) are built only within
>the kernel. Therefore, a modular kernel that does not include COMPAT_50
>cannot access these values,
In article <79da22d1-8cc4-4354-ade3-99820650e...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de>,
J. Hannken-Illjes wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>The attached diff makes the spec_node table implementation private
>to sys/miscfs/specfs/spec_vnops.c. To retrieve a spec_node, two new
>lookup functions (by device or by mount) are impleme
In article ,
Greg Troxel wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>
>--- a/netbsd/src/sys/rump/librump/rumpkern/arch/i386/spinlock.c
>+++ b/netbsd/src/sys/rump/librump/rumpkern/arch/i386/spinlock.c
>@@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ __cpu_simple_lock_try(__cpu_simple_lock_t *lockp)
>
> val = __SIMPLELOCK_LOCKED;
> __a
In article ,
Garrett Cooper wrote:
> This is what I would like to happen (similar to LTP with Linux), but it
>hasn't yet because of other items on my priority list of things to do.
>But, I would really like working with someone at NetBSD (and hopefully
>eventually DragonFlyBSD and OpenBSD)
In article <74e9a033-b75c-45b8-beee-a7380baa8...@gmail.com>,
Garrett Cooper wrote:
>On Jan 13, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Martin Husemann wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:49:06AM +, David Holland wrote:
>>> Nope, don't have that kind of setup and atf is way too invasive to
>>> allow just buildi
In article <20130112154830.gc22...@falu.nl>, Rhialto wrote:
>I just noticed that FreeBSD's new 9.1 release has Kernel Mode Setting:
>
>The drm2(4) Intel GPU driver, which supports GEM and KMS and works with
>new generations of GPUs such as IronLake, SandyBridge, and IvyBridge,
>has been added. Th
In article ,
Marc Balmer wrote:
>
>Am 09.01.2013 um 16:28 schrieb matthew green :
>
>>
>>> I want to import the lua(4) device driver, which is currently a
>module only, which seems wrong.
>>>
>>> Is sys/dev/lua/ a good place?
>>
>> can you give a little more details on what is included?
>
>Sur
In article ,
Matt Thomas wrote:
>
>http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/dev/usb/files.usb?rev=1.106&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
>>
>> Normally, the XXX_DEBUG options are not specified in any files.* files,
>> meaning that as they are unknown options, they will translate into a
>> CP
Hi,
USB_DEBUG is defopt'ed and it is used as a global knob in usb.h:
#ifdef USB_DEBUG
#define Static
#define FOO_DEBUG
#define BAR_DEBUG
...
#define BAZ_DEBUG
#else
#define Static static
#endif
This is done for drivers which don't include "opt_usb.h" so they will not
recognize when USB_DEBUG ch
In article ,
Andy Ruhl wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Lars Heidieker
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Edgar Fuß wrote:
Doesn't this depend on filesystem journaling?
>>> Can someone please enlighten me?
>>> Is it safe to use write cacheing on a SATA drive with FFS/WAPBL
In article <20121210195346.ga8...@apb-laptoy.apb.alt.za>,
Alan Barrett wrote:
>> also, EINVAL doesn't seem like a great error code for this
>> condition. it's not an input parameter that's causing the
>> error, but rather that the required output format cannot express
>> the data to be return
In article <31490263-5a8e-411a-bb57-f7fc5cffc...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de>,
J. Hannken-Illjes wrote:
>The more I think the more I just want to remove forced unmounts.
I think that any operation that cannot be undone (and requires reboot
to be undone) makes the OS less resilient to failure.
>To take some
In article <20121125152520.ga17...@panix.com>,
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 06:53:16PM +0100, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>> Let's try to move forward, and I will start will a sum up of what I
>> understand from the standard. It would be nice if we could at least
>> reach conse
In article <20121106221628.gl22...@trav.math.uni-bonn.de>,
Edgar Fuß wrote:
>So, while investigating my WAPL performance problems, It looks like I can
>crash the machine (not reliably, but more often that not) with a simple
> seq 1 3000 | xargs mkdir
>command. I get the following backtrace
In article <5090fc73.4060...@execsw.org>,
Masanobu SAITOH wrote:
> Hi, all.
>
> I sent the followin mail more than two years ago.
>
>> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2010/07/28/msg008613.html
>
> As the starting point to solve this problem, I committed the change to
>add SIOCGETHERCAP stu
In article
,
Bob Lee wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> Recently, was asked to backport the driver to our version of NetBSD5.
>I've included
>the diff of non-driver files, and a separate diff for the ixgbe driver
>which is in CVS,
>but not included in the netbsd_5 label.
> The ixgbe driver sup
On Oct 24, 6:35am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: suenv
| Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > The threaded/non-threaded case is a particularly nasty
| > example, where a program might assume that it can use static storage
| > and non-threaded interfaces (res_foo(
In article <20121023162142.gb24...@panix.com>,
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>
>Nasty hacks like subverting the protection against LD_PRELOAD
>on setuid executables are not called for in a case like this.
>If we resort to them, why should our users trust us to deliver
>quality software? If you want
In article ,
wrote:
>But apache is security critical, isn't it? And it certainly is
>threaded. Or are you applying the term "security critical" only to a
>smaller set of components?
Yes, but apache is designed to be threaded. login, su, and other
pam users not necessarily. Typically program
In article <201210150327.xaa12...@sparkle.rodents-montreal.org>,
Mouse wrote:
>>> I've run into an issue with gdb on 5.1, [...]
>> Fixed in 6. You'll need all my sys/ commits around 2011-08-20 ->
>> 2011-09-05
>
>Any chance of pullups to netbsd-5? Or am I on my own for that?
I don't think that
In article <201210142318.taa11...@sparkle.rodents-montreal.org>,
Mouse wrote:
>I've run into an issue with gdb on 5.1, and ktrace leads me to think
>it's likely a kernel issue (hence this list). It wouldn't surprise me
>too much if I were wrong, though; feel free to point me elsewhere if
>approp
In article <20121014193635.6ccf360...@jupiter.mumble.net>,
Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>The attached patches fixes a lot of issues in our zfs port mainly
>having to do with locking and our (insane) vop protocols. With it,
>many of the zfs tests pass much more reliably, although there
On Sep 19, 12:38am, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| Hello,
| so it seems we can't do much better in compat_linux.
| Here's an updated patch, which checks the size before malloc in mfifioctl(),
| and I also removed a debug printf i
On Sep 17, 9:22pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| I agree it's too complicated. Couldn't we just keep the dispatch based on
| com then ?
Let's leave it as it is.
christos
On Sep 17, 8:42pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 02:30:03PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > On Sep 17, 5:47pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
| > -- Subject: Re: pass-through
On Sep 17, 8:42pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 02:31:35PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > On Sep 17, 6:08pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
| > -- Subject: Re: pass-through
On Sep 17, 6:08pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| Sorry but I can't see how a kernel with COMPAT_LINUX but without
| mfi would compile.
You you get the major by name using "mfi"...
christos
On Sep 17, 5:47pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| But this assumes that the mfi driver is compiled in. it doesn't
| look right, especially in the context of modules.
It works for modules (which is the reason we cannot cache the
On Sep 17, 2:49pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pass-through linux ioctl for mfi(4)
| I agree, but I don't know how to do this (is there a better way than
| hardcoding mfi's major number in compat_linux), can you give details on how
| you would do this ?
devsw_na
In article <20120916152553.ga1...@antioche.eu.org>,
Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 03:23:22PM +0200, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>> Hello,
>> the attached patch adds a pass-through ioctl interface, with the
>
>As several of you noctied I forgot (once again) to attach the pa
In article <20120916132322.ga6...@antioche.eu.org>,
Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>Hello,
>the attached patch adds a pass-through ioctl interface, with the
>necessery linux compat code, for mfi(4). This allows to run the
>linux binary of the MegaCLI tool provided by LSI logic.
>Adding support for the Free
In article <20120912202823.ga5...@antioche.eu.org>,
Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>Hello,
>I'm trying to run a FreeBSD binary under emulation, but it dies in this
>piece of code:
> if (sysctl(mib, 2, &_usrstack, &len, NULL, 0) == -1)
> PANIC("Cannot get kern.usrstack from sysctl");
>
>
On Sep 12, 4:04pm, mar...@duskware.de (Martin Husemann) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src
| On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:00:52PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > This is orthogonal. I believe that in the discussion we had in core
| > we decided to not define _UC_TLSBASE unconditionall
On Sep 6, 12:57pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: quotactl permissions
| On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 08:43:56AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > Least intrusive way, since the right way has not even been decided.
|
| Shall I send a patch to releng-6 that chan
On Sep 6, 6:04am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: quotactl permissions
| Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > Yes, but it should all be encapsulated in the kauth call. It is an
abstraction
| > violation to do the id check separately.
|
| What is the prefered way
In article <20120905123416.gb10...@homeworld.netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 06:37:27AM +, David Holland wrote:
>> Changing it to effective uid seems like a good plan.
>
>The change below fixes the test case. Is it safe to commit?
Yes, but it should all be encap
On Aug 25, 9:10am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [PATCH] swapcontext vs libpthread
| On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 03:10:51AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| [Call a C function from hppa assembly]
| > Yes, that loads the address to %1, you'll need to call af
On Aug 25, 7:00am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [PATCH] swapcontext vs libpthread
| > FIX: ./alpha/gen/swapcontext.S: CALL(setcontext)/*
setcontext(ucp) */
|
| That one seems already fine to me. The CALL macro is here to invoke a function
| Am I
On Aug 25, 4:11am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [PATCH] swapcontext vs libpthread
| On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:26:24PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > In lib/libc/sys/Makefile.inc, move setcontext.S from the ASM section to the
| > WEAKASM section. This will
On Aug 25, 1:51am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [PATCH] swapcontext vs libpthread
| On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:24:03AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > Why do you say that? pthread_cancelstub.c does exactly this (wrapping
| > a syscall and calling it) all th
In article <20120822170050.gj2...@homeworld.netbsd.org>,
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Here is an updated patch for sorting out swapcontext with libpthread,
>with documentation and test cases.
>
>I would appreciate feedback on LWP_PRESERVETLS flag to _lwp_create().
>This tells the kerne
On Aug 11, 1:35pm, t...@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] _UC_TLSBASE for all ports
| On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 06:45:12AM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| >
| > It is a slippery slope, but I think in this case it is wise to bend.
| > If we cannot reach
On Aug 11, 5:13pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] _UC_TLSBASE for all ports
| > Well, why don't we make it that way then?
|
| We cannot toggle an option that does not exist, so that require adding
| _UC_TLSBASE for ports that miss it. This meets a strong
On Aug 11, 12:40pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] _UC_TLSBASE for all ports
| Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > I could believe that, if the change suggested to make this the default
| > behavior (which some would argue it should be...)
|
| In an ideal
On Aug 11, 11:16am, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] _UC_TLSBASE for all ports
| Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > Like it or not most of the world has turned into linux. We can either
| > provide compatibility where possible (and not overly disgusti
In article <20120810173818.ga8...@britannica.bec.de>,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 07:31:59PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>>
>> > I maintain that trying to move contexts between threads is an inherently
>> > bad idea and that it is a very in
In article <20120803084934.GA3362@bugfree>,
Arnaud Degroote wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>On 01/Aug - 21:43, KIYOHARA Takashi wrote:
>> Hi! all,
>>
>>
>> I have a 'I-O DATA WN-G54/CF'. And some on-board 88W8686 has on
>> pcmcia-bus of Gumstix.
>> I think, malo@pcmcia and malo@pci is all different. T
In article ,
Michael van Elst wrote:
>
>Let wd1 disappear and the raid will try to use wd0a (dk0) and sd0a (dk1).
>Of course raidframe will notice the mismatch in this case, but you can
>easily imagine more complex scenarios where it doesn't. But a simple
>failure case comes from trying to recover
In article ,
Michael van Elst wrote:
>e...@math.uni-bonn.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Edgar_Fu=DF?=) writes:
>
>>> It probably won't help you with raidframe.
>>It would indeed help in my case. In case sd6 has gone missing, so dk4
>is on the RAID and not on sd6, it would prevent the wrong filesystem
>being m
In article <20120723141721.gj4...@trav.math.uni-bonn.de>,
Edgar Fuß wrote:
>Can I somehow pin down which dk? gets assigned to which GPT partition?
>
>In a disklabel world, I have components sd2a..sd6a making raid1.
>I then have raid1a mounted on /export/home and raid1e on /export/mail.
>
>In a GP
In article <4ff09c68.6000...@gmail.com>,
Adam Hoka wrote:
>
>I plan to commit this if there are no good reasons or suggestions for an
>alternative solution.
>
>I think it doesn't hide the problem, as it still prints a warning as it
>used to. The only thing it removes is the bogus message about ki
In article <20120625165303.ga11...@asim.lip6.fr>,
Manuel Bouyer wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 09:39:45AM -0700, Brian Buhrow wrote:
>> Hello. While I agree with Manuel's assertion that the system becomes
>> stalled while all these retries are happening, I actually like all the
>> retries,
On Jun 24, 9:35pm, adam.h...@gmail.com (Adam Hoka) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: zero runtime when negative
| I agree, but I think in this situation it's still the right thing to do
| to keep resource limits accurate. Anyway, we still have a printout
| (which is only printed once for some reason, I don'
In article <4fe6ce73.70...@gmail.com>, Adam Hoka wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Can you guys please check if the following makes sense:
>
>http://www.netbsd.org/~ahoka/patches/timebackwards.diff
>
>The use case is the following:
>
>After starting NetBSD in vmware I see a lot of RLIMIT_CPU reached
>messag
In article ,
Matt Thomas wrote:
>
>Looking at QNX docs, it seems that exceeding
>RLIMIT_NTHR causes attempts to create threads
>(e.g. by calling pthread_create()) fails.
>
>Interesting that RLIMIT_NTHR seems to be per-process.
simpler to implement that way :-)
christos
On Jun 13, 2:15am, y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
| > Can you explain what you mean by api incompatible? It is used in getrlimit
the
| > same way we use it, how can it be different?
|
| it's semantics (what's counted for) is different, isn't
On Jun 12, 2:46am, y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
| >
https://bdsc.webapps.blackberry.com/native/reference/com.qnx.doc.neutrino.lib_ref/topic/g/getrlimit.html
|
| if it's incompatible (i don't know), there's no reason to use
| an inconsistent
On Jun 8, 6:22pm, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
| Hmmm, I think maxlwp should go in param.c and there should a MAXLWP.
Ok, new diff
http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/maxlwp.diff
christos
On Jun 8, 5:10pm, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
|
| On Jun 8, 2012, at 4:47 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
| >
| > Rather than have all the #ifdef __HAVE_CPU_MAXLWP how about doing
| >
| > #ifndef __HAVE_CPU_MAXLWP
| > static inline int
| > cpu_maxlwp(vo
On Jun 8, 4:47pm, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
|
| On Jun 8, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| > In article ,
| > Matt Thomas wrote:
| >>
| >> On Jun 8, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| >>
|
In article <20120608173711.gm20...@pixotech.com>,
David Young wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 10:34:52PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Linux has grown those two, and claim 20% performance improvement on some
>> workloads. Some programs al
In article ,
Matt Thomas wrote:
>
>On Jun 8, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
>> On Jun 8, 9:00am, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
>>
>> |
>> | On Jun 8, 2012, at 5:24 AM, Christos Zoulas wro
On Jun 8, 9:00am, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: lwp resource limit
|
| On Jun 8, 2012, at 5:24 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
| >> + if (l->l_flag & LW_RESCOUNT)
| >>
| >> I don't see the need for this, why not check p_nlwp == 1?
| >
In article <83819dd9-7d1b-4c27-aa52-8c281e293...@3am-software.com>,
Matt Thomas wrote:
>
>On Jun 7, 2012, at 7:31 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
>> New version addressing most of the issues:
>>
>>http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/maxlwp.diff
>>
>>
Hi,
Linux has grown those two, and claim 20% performance improvement on some
workloads. Some programs already use them, so we are going to need them
for emulation anyway...
http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/mmsg.diff
christos
New version addressing most of the issues:
http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/maxlwp.diff
If I don't hear any objections I will commit it over the weekend, and
then I am going to start working on amending the documentation and
resource users (shells etc.)
christos
In article <20120605013242.ga7...@panix.com>,
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 06:13:09PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>
>> That is a good idea! The only problem with it is that ps -sx and the sysctl
>> limit will not match (the limit will be lowe
On Jun 5, 6:14am, m...@eterna.com.au (matthew green) wrote:
-- Subject: re: lwp resource limit
|
| > >1024 seems to small for me. How about 2048 (if not 4096)? Please make
| > >it a #define somewhere (perhaps lwp.h?). When would the MD code override
| > >the value?
| >
| > I just followed th
In article <20120603194407.72f5514a...@mail.netbsd.org>,
Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
>
>maxlwp should be __read_mostly. However, why is it (and all sysctls)
>in init_main.c? I suppose you just followed current way (just historic
>code), but I think it is a bad practice. We should move such
601 - 700 of 818 matches
Mail list logo
