Re: armv7 bus_dmamap_sync(9) fix

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 01:01:01PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 12:53:54AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > So Theo's SROP mitigation diff made my armv7 machine completely > > unstable. Filesystem-related panics, random core dumps, files with > > blocks of zeroes on them,

Re: armv7 bus_dmamap_sync(9) fix

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 12:53:54AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > So Theo's SROP mitigation diff made my armv7 machine completely > unstable. Filesystem-related panics, random core dumps, files with > blocks of zeroes on them, etc. > > Looking at the changes in question, there is no way they're >

Accept cnmac as a valid rootdev from uboot on octeon

I am nfs booting my edgerouter lite and didn't like to have to manually enter 'cnmac0' as my root device every boot. This is what I came up with. I stole the idea from macppc and modified it a little. Am I way off here? Index: sys/arch/octeon/octeon/autoconf.c

Re: opendev and pledge: "privsep" for dumpfs(8)

Theo de Raadt writes: >> Must say the forking and piping seems to be a bit silly for a program >> like this. Certainly adds alot of complexity. Why not simply call >> opendev up front for each filesystem, creating a list of names and >> filedescriptors before you

armv7 bus_dmamap_sync(9) fix

So Theo's SROP mitigation diff made my armv7 machine completely unstable. Filesystem-related panics, random core dumps, files with blocks of zeroes on them, etc. Looking at the changes in question, there is no way they're responsible for this behavior. This smells like cache-related bug

Re: cleanup pppd auth

"Ted Unangst" writes: > While making a small change to pppd, I noticed there is a lot of PAM and > shadow code which is not relevant to us. The aspiring developer may then > switch to bsd auth or even just crypt_checkpass, but first purge the tangly > morass. ok jca@, but

Re: sendbug subject

"trondd" writes: > On Sun, May 15, 2016 1:22 pm, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote: >> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 06:43:16PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >>> "Ted Unangst" writes: >>> >>> > i'm tired of seeing bug reports with no subject. i

cleanup pppd auth

While making a small change to pppd, I noticed there is a lot of PAM and shadow code which is not relevant to us. The aspiring developer may then switch to bsd auth or even just crypt_checkpass, but first purge the tangly morass. Index: auth.c

Re: sendbug subject

On Sun, May 15, 2016 1:22 pm, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 06:43:16PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >> "Ted Unangst" writes: >> >> > i'm tired of seeing bug reports with no subject. i also get a fair bit >> of spam >> > with no

Re: sendbug subject

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 06:43:16PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > "Ted Unangst" writes: > > > i'm tired of seeing bug reports with no subject. i also get a fair bit of > > spam > > with no subject and i am easily confused. something is better than nothing. > > I

another buffer underflow segfault in regexec(3)

Hi, there is another segfault in regexec(3), engine.c, backref(), similar to the one i just reported, with the following difference: The first elementary atom in the expression must be "[[:<:]]" or "\<" rather than '^'. The condition screwing up is: case OBOW: if (( (sp

Re: sendbug subject

"Ted Unangst" writes: > i'm tired of seeing bug reports with no subject. i also get a fair bit of spam > with no subject and i am easily confused. something is better than nothing. I fear that after that change all bug reports will only have [bug report] as Subject.

sendbug subject

i'm tired of seeing bug reports with no subject. i also get a fair bit of spam with no subject and i am easily confused. something is better than nothing. Index: sendbug.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/sendbug/sendbug.c,v

buffer underflow segfault in regexec(3)

Hi, while studying martijn@'s pending regexec(3) patch, i found a read-access one-byte buffer underflow in "case OBOL" in the function backref(), file libc/regex/engine.c. I think outright bugs (like crashes) ought to be fixed before improving functionality. So i'd like to get this in first,

Re: multiple routing tables

Am 15.05.2016 12:10 schrieb Stefan Sperling: They key point seems to be that you're trying to route between different rdomains. I believe you must use pf to route traffic coming from this IP (which is in rdomain 0) to vether1 (which is in rdomain 2) or look into pair(4), also. -- pb

Re: update Mesa to 11.2.2

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 06:45:54PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:01:49AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 01:30:08PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > > > Still looking for some tests on r600 and powerpc for this. > > > > Tested on amd64 on > > > >

Re: Is loss of read-only /usr permanent?

Sat, 14 May 2016 19:47:59 +0100 Kevin Chadwick > > Finally, the read only file systems on a writable medium susceptible > > to all sorts of failure modes is a silly silly useless trick. This > > does not provide any real technical benefit but your own discomfort. > > Pipe

Re: multiple routing tables

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 10:53:49PM +0200, Piotr Kubaj wrote: > H‌‌i, > > I need help with multiple routing tables, because the tutorials on the > Internet is pretty much scarce. The router is Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite > running OpenBSD 5.9. > > > I've got two public IP's attached by DHCP - since

Re: update Mesa to 11.2.2

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 06:45:54PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:01:49AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 01:30:08PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > > > Still looking for some tests on r600 and powerpc for this. > > > > Tested on amd64 on > > > >

Re: update Mesa to 11.2.2

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:01:49AM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 01:30:08PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > > Still looking for some tests on r600 and powerpc for this. > > Tested on amd64 on > > radeondrm0 at pci2 dev 0 function 0 "ATI Radeon Mobility HD 5430" rev > 0x00

multiple routing tables

H‌‌i, I need help with multiple routing tables, because the tutorials on the Internet is pretty much scarce. The router is Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite running OpenBSD 5.9. I've got two public IP's attached by DHCP - since I don't want to use multiple physical NIC's, I use two vether interfaces

Re: update Mesa to 11.2.2

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 01:30:08PM +1000, Jonathan Gray wrote: > Still looking for some tests on r600 and powerpc for this. Tested on amd64 on radeondrm0 at pci2 dev 0 function 0 "ATI Radeon Mobility HD 5430" rev 0x00 and on macppc on radeondrm0 at pci2 dev 2 function 0 "ATI Radeon VË rev 0x00