Re: [9fans] iwp9 2011 program
Francisco J Ballesteros n...@lsub.org wrote: This is the provisional program for IWP9 2011. It will be updated in the web site soon, but in the mean time, this is how it looks like. Possibly a silly question, but on the website I cannot see any reference to such. Is this event going to be streamed online? Cheers -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: Baby On Board.
Re: [9fans] Security, take 2.
Devon H. O'Dell devon.od...@gmail.com wrote: Given the feedback from the list, I've come up with two alternatives. (Well, one of them was actually Mechiel's brainchild). Idea #1 (From Mechiel) [snipped] Maybe it's just the packet shifter in me, but could not the ideas of Token Buckets[1], Random Early Detection[2], Weighted Fair Queuing[3] and such be applied to memory/cpu resource allocation? You would have to replace terms like 'bandwidth' with something like 'free memory' but it would end up resulting in a fair system that usually means fewer knobs for sysadmins to tweak? Probably the only knobs the sysadin would want to tweak in the end is resources that would be considered reserved/guarenteed availability[4] to backplane (aka critical OS-esque) systems? So you could say no matter what a mess some user made of my system, I want to be always able to get to 10% of the RAM/CPU time. I can imagine the WFQ being helpful in something that blocks requests for more memory in chunks of time that grows expotentially with the amount of memory that has already been allocated. The win would be you can mix big resource users with the lightweight ones on the same CPU servers...would you not? The knobs for tweaking would be be more to scaling factors rather than limits/caps. I'll now go back to lurking... :) Cheers [1] http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-24.htm [2] http://www.opalsoft.net/qos/DS-26.htm [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_fair_queuing [4] in the packet shifting world it's called Expedited Forwarding (EF) -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: What does it mean if there is no fortune for you?
Re: [9fans] Fwd: New Chip (SEAforth 40C18) - New Challenge
Robert Raschke rtrli...@googlemail.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:00 PM, maht mattmob...@proweb.co.uk wrote: SeaForth is dead already http://colorforth.com/vTPL.htm http://colorforth.com/S40.htm These docs aren't dated. And I remember a lot of discussion about 1 - 2 years ago about the patent issues surrounding Chuck Moore's work. So I'm wondering if this info is outdated. The Forth Usernet group seems to indicate that these chips are fine and dandy. For whatever it's worth: a...@berk:~$ wget -S --spider http://colorforth.com/S40.htm Spider mode enabled. Check if remote file exists. --2009-04-07 11:47:19-- http://colorforth.com/S40.htm Resolving colorforth.com... 207.217.125.50 Connecting to colorforth.com|207.217.125.50|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:47:20 GMT Server: Apache Last-Modified: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 19:52:50 GMT ETag: 2e6982-849-49da5d92 Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length: 2121 Keep-Alive: timeout=10, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html Length: 2121 (2.1K) [text/html] Remote file exists and could contain further links, but recursion is disabled -- not retrieving. a...@berk:~$ wget -S --spider http://colorforth.com/vTPL.htm Spider mode enabled. Check if remote file exists. --2009-04-07 11:47:21-- http://colorforth.com/vTPL.htm Resolving colorforth.com... 207.217.125.50 Connecting to colorforth.com|207.217.125.50|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:47:21 GMT Server: Apache Last-Modified: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 19:48:29 GMT --- ETag: 172cd95-688-49da5c8d Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length: 1672 Keep-Alive: timeout=10, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html Length: 1672 (1.6K) [text/html] Remote file exists and could contain further links, but recursion is disabled -- not retrieving. Cheers -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: You will receive a legacy which will place you above want.
Re: [9fans] hardware idea
erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote: Probably easier to develop on: http://www.embeddedarm.com/products/board-detail.php?product=TS-7800 The NAND annoyingly is not via the SoC and there are a few other quirks however as you can boot off the SD card (making it unbrickable and dead easy to play with kernel dev work), it has real serial ports where you do not have to faff with to get them and of course the SATA ports. nice find. thanks. too bad it doesn't expose all 4 sata ports. and way too bad that currently 0 toy budget $1. The Marvell SoC only has the one controller with two ports going out anway so I am pretty sure it's a SATA port multiplier you would be playing around with in there, and that's going to be fustrating. Cheers -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: manic-depressive, adj.: Easy glum, easy glow.
Re: [9fans] hardware idea
erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote: i think this marvell media vault soc has quite a bit of promise. this product seems to be an arm core + a mashup of other marvell parts. the sata controller appears to have the same register interfaces as the one driven by sdmv50xx.c. the ethernet controller is not currently supported, but there appears to be enough documentation to support it. (as an added bonus, though i haven't had a chance to check in detail, i would guess this would help support x86 marvell lom parts (mv643xx) as well!) http://www.marvell.com/products/media/index.jsp the User Manual has all the crunchy register specs. here's a few products based on this soc: http://www.portwell.com.tw/products/NAD-1004_ca.html http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822165130 it would be so much nicer running a plan 9. Probably easier to develop on: http://www.embeddedarm.com/products/board-detail.php?product=TS-7800 The NAND annoyingly is not via the SoC and there are a few other quirks however as you can boot off the SD card (making it unbrickable and dead easy to play with kernel dev work), it has real serial ports where you do not have to faff with to get them and of course the SATA ports. It would be as good if not better than the Joe Public devices. Cheers -- Alexander Clouter .sigmonster says: Stupidity got us into this mess -- why can't it get us out?
