re: CVS commit: src/sys/netinet

2015-11-08 Thread Roy Marples

On 2015-11-06 20:07, matthew green wrote:

Roy Marples writes:

On 06/11/2015 08:38, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
> Module Name:   src
> Committed By:  ozaki-r
> Date:  Fri Nov  6 08:38:43 UTC 2015
>
> Modified Files:
>src/sys/netinet: if_arp.c
>
> Log Message:
> Fix inappropriate rt_flags check
>
> It depended on either RTF_CLONED or RTF_CLONING must be set, however,
> the assumption didn't meet for userland problems that create a route
> via RTM_ADD.

Userland can set RTF_CLONING on any route.

>
> This fixes an issue that running rarpd causes the following kernel panic
> reported by nonaka@:
>   panic: kernel diagnostic assertion "(la->la_flags & LLE_STATIC) == 0"
>   failed: file "/usr/src/sys/netinet/if_arp.c", line 1339

While I agree that the panic should be fixed, should rarpd be fixed 
too
add the RTF_CLONING flag if indeed it is a subnet route on the 
attached

network or should userland never care about this flag and all added
routes should be considered as attached (keep in mind we want similar
semantics for IPv6 routes).


rarpd might need to be changed, but it shouldn't need to be "fixed"
otherwise we've broken binary compatibility.


It was more fixing the intent of the code if the added subnet route 
allows neighbours, or if we want to continue using RTF_CLONING to mean 
that.

I'm not suggesting, or implying, we want to break binary compat.

Roy


re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/sparc64/sparc64

2015-11-08 Thread matthew green
> Module Name:  src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Mon Nov  9 02:13:41 UTC 2015
> 
> Modified Files:
>   src/sys/arch/sparc64/sparc64: syscall.c
> 
> Log Message:
> fix printf formats.

yuck, can't you just use PRId64 instead of the casts?  these are
int64 members.  also, using %# vs 0x% :-)


.mrg.