On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 03:37:43PM +, Joe Davis wrote:
> sparc support hasn't existed for 6 releases, the following diff removes
> some remaining references to sun4c and sun4e machines in the manpages.
>
> Cheers,
> Joe
>
fixed, thanks.
jmc
> Index: hme.4
>
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> trondd wrote in <49f29107642e86c17283b0582a9f09f4.squir...@mail.kagu-tsu\
> chi.com>:
> |On Sun, November 3, 2019 12:02 pm, trondd wrote:
> |> On Sun, November 3, 2019 6:27 am, Florian Obser wrote:
> |>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:21:59PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot
this makes it harder to mess up the assignment of a protocol to the
right slot in the CTL_IPPROTO_NAMES initialiser. it also shrinks the
code a lot, and i think it makes what the array index means a lot more
explicit.
this gets used in sysctl(8), which still works as expected after
this change.
trondd wrote in <49f29107642e86c17283b0582a9f09f4.squir...@mail.kagu-tsu\
chi.com>:
|On Sun, November 3, 2019 12:02 pm, trondd wrote:
|> On Sun, November 3, 2019 6:27 am, Florian Obser wrote:
|>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:21:59PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
|>>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at
hook_establish can fail, but drivers are inconsistent about checking for
that. apparently there's also a requirement that detach hooks are
run in opposite order to the one they were established in, but that
is also applied inconsistently by drivers.
this replaces if_detachhooks with a task_list,
On Sun, November 3, 2019 12:02 pm, trondd wrote:
> On Sun, November 3, 2019 6:27 am, Florian Obser wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:21:59PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:16:56PM +0100, Florian Obser wrote:
>>> > I like it, if someone who is fluent in ksh line
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 02:01:57PM +0200, Kapetanakis Giannis wrote:
> On 25/10/2019 13:57, Remi Locherer wrote:
> > Hi tech@,
> >
> > earlier this year I sent a diff that allowed to change an interface
> > from broadcast to point-to-point.
> >
> >
ok?
Index: rwlock.9
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man9/rwlock.9,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -p -r1.24 rwlock.9
--- rwlock.925 Feb 2019 22:03:56 - 1.24
+++ rwlock.94 Nov 2019 14:25:19 -
@@ -238,6 +238,7
Hello,
thank you so much, I did some tests with my X553 and the system survived
all of my tests. Running tcpbench and unplugging the cables several times,
ifconfig down & up.
I think, the performance looks good too:
cpu0 at mainbus0: apid 4 (boot processor)
cpu0: Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C3558 @
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 09:06:03AM -0700, Tracey Emery wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:56:14PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > If you want to test -34 you can copy the -34 firmware file on top of
> > the -22 file. (Keep a backup!)
> >
> > Alternatively, you could change the filename the
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:56:14PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> If you want to test -34 you can copy the -34 firmware file on top of
> the -22 file. (Keep a backup!)
>
> Alternatively, you could change the filename the driver will look for.
> The lines in if_iwm.c which would need to be
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 08:31:07AM -0700, Tracey Emery wrote:
> Both diffs work fine here. However, it appears I'm still only loading
> the -22 firmware:
>
> iwm0: hw rev 0x230, fw ver 22.391740.0
>
> Am I missing something obvious to get it to load the -34 firmware, or do
> the two work in
Both diffs work fine here. However, it appears I'm still only loading
the -22 firmware:
iwm0: hw rev 0x230, fw ver 22.391740.0
Am I missing something obvious to get it to load the -34 firmware, or do
the two work in conjunction? I tried moving the -22 firmware out of the
way, but that caused a
This diff adds support for new iwm firmare's umac scan API.
It is required to make scanning work on -34 firmware.
Combined with the 'new ADD_STA' diff I just sent out, this is the last
change we need to get -34 firmware working.
This adds a couple of lines under #ifdef notyet for ax200 devices
Add support for the new ADD_STA command API. Required for -34 firmware.
The significant changes are that the purpose of each STA in the firmware
table is now identified by an 'STA type' flag, and that the Rx block ack
window size is now specified in the command. The layout is backwards
On 25/10/2019 13:57, Remi Locherer wrote:
> Hi tech@,
>
> earlier this year I sent a diff that allowed to change an interface
> from broadcast to point-to-point.
>
> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=156132923203704=2
>
> It turned out that this was not sufficient. It made the adjacency
> come up
(adding claudio as the most recent contributor)
As per https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=157191651123338=2 this is
no longer used and can be removed.
Before:
$ sysctl -a | grep mpls
net.mpls.ttl=255
net.mpls.maxloop_inkernel=16
net.mpls.mapttl_ip=1
net.mpls.mapttl_ip6=0
After:
$ sysctl -a |
17 matches
Mail list logo