On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]

2012-08-01 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: You don't want to work cooperatively. Why is it that mbuf's refactoring consultation is being held in internal, private, committers-and-invite-only-restricted meeting at BSDCan ? Why is it that so much review and

Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]

2012-08-01 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: You don't want to work cooperatively. Why is it that mbuf's

Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]

2012-08-01 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On 8/1/12, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue

Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]

2012-08-01 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: Any interested party is very welcome to approach a developer and get added to the developer summits. Plenty of the people at the most recent developer summit weren't @freebsd.org committers - we had plenty of

Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..]

2012-08-01 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Aug 1, 2012, at 3:39 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: Any interested party is very welcome to approach a developer and get added to the developer

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-31 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: [...] We lack that right now, which is why you're trying to shoe-horn the FDT connections into a newbus world and complaining that everything sucks because it is a poor fit. I'd suggest that different mechanisms are

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-31 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 31, 2012, at 9:20 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: [...] We lack that right now, which is why you're trying to shoe-horn the FDT connections

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-30 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 5:06 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:03:14 am Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote

Re: RFC: libkern version of inet_ntoa_r

2012-07-29 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote: Remapping f(a) into f(a, b) requires both a macro and a wrapping function, something like this T __f(T1 a, T2 b) { return f(a, b); } #define f(a) __f(a, b) This can be done way more easily: void

Re: RFC: libkern version of inet_ntoa_r

2012-07-29 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org wrote: Hello, Luigi. You wrote 30 июля 2012 г., 0:47:21: #define fn(x) ({ fn(x, 42); }) LR nice trick, one always learns something on these lists... LR now i wonder how it works with MSVC (windows being one of the LR

Re: panic: _mtx_lock_sleep: recursed on non-recursive mutex em0 @ /usr/src/sys/dev/e1000/if_lem.c:881

2012-07-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: It looks like a case of lock held during call up the stack. This is bad for so many reasons. It also makes writing correctly locked drivers a pain in the ass as the moment you unlock the driver before calling

Re: panic: _mtx_lock_sleep: recursed on non-recursive mutex em0 @ /usr/src/sys/dev/e1000/if_lem.c:881

2012-07-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 28 July 2012 12:09, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: How would a single ATH_LOCK() helps here ? AFAICS, the panic seem to be a classical fallout from direct dispatch where you can re-enter the driver from

Re: RFC: libkern version of inet_ntoa_r

2012-07-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net wrote: On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Luigi Rizzo wrote: During some ipfw/dummynet cleanup i noticed that the libkern version of inet_ntoa_r() is missing the buffer size argument that is present in the libc counterpart.

Re: RFC: libkern version of inet_ntoa_r

2012-07-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net wrote: On Sat, 28 Jul 2012, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net wrote: On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Luigi Rizzo wrote: During some ipfw

Re: RFC: libkern version of inet_ntoa_r

2012-07-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net wrote: Which again leaves me with the question - why does libc have it? as for the semantic, theoretical, why, I would refer you to the POSIX's comity, as inet_ntop() is part of it. - Arnaud

Re: RFC: libkern version of inet_ntoa_r

2012-07-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb-li...@lists.zabbadoz.net wrote: Which again leaves me with the question - why does libc have it? as for the semantic, theoretical, why, I would refer you

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: [..] Honestly, though, I think you'll be more pissed when you find out that the N:1 interface that you want is being done in the wrong

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-13 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: [..] Honestly, though, I think you'll be more pissed when you find out that the N:1 interface that you want is being done in the wrong domain. But I've been wrong before and look forward to seeing your replacement. I

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-12 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: I'm sorry you feel that way. Honestly, though, I think you'll be more pissed when you find out that the N:1 interface that you want is being done in the wrong domain. But I've been wrong before and look forward to

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-11 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 9

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-11 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 11:27 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: Also, I think we should do this in general. We already have one example (e.g. ACPI IVARs start at 100 so that things like the ACPI PCI bus driver can provide both ACPI and PCI IVARs to child devices). I think we should

newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi folks, Ok, yet another Newbus' limitation. Assuming a device exports more than one interface, and one of its child has need to use more than one interface, each interfaces cannot register, concurrently, its own ivar. While I try to always have a single child per interface/resource, I need to

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 7:22 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Ok, yet another Newbus' limitation. Assuming a device exports more than one interface, and one of its child has need to use more than one interface, each interfaces

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 9:26 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 7:22 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Ok, yet another Newbus' limitation. Assuming

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 7:22 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Ok, yet another Newbus' limitation. Assuming a device exports more than one interface, and one of its child has need to use more than one interface, each interfaces

Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..

2012-07-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2012, at 9:26 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Warner

Re: Interfacing devices with multiple parents within newbus

2012-07-07 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Ian Lepore free...@damnhippie.dyndns.org wrote: On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 16:45 -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Ian Lepore free...@damnhippie.dyndns.org wrote: On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:46 -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi

Re: Interfacing devices with multiple parents within newbus

2012-07-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote: On Jul 5, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi folks, The problem has been raised in the last BSDCan during a talk, but no clear answer has been given. Some (pseudo-)devices might require resources from multiple

Re: Interfacing devices with multiple parents within newbus

2012-07-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: That's neither correct nor robust in a couple of way: 1) you have no guarantee a device unit will always give you the same resource. this raises the following question: how can a device, today, figure out which

Re: Interfacing devices with multiple parents within newbus

2012-07-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Ian Lepore free...@damnhippie.dyndns.org wrote: On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:46 -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: That's neither correct nor robust in a couple of way: 1) you have

Interfacing devices with multiple parents within newbus

2012-07-05 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi folks, The problem has been raised in the last BSDCan during a talk, but no clear answer has been given. Some (pseudo-)devices might require resources from multiple other (pseudo-)devices. For example, a device is sitting on an SMBus, but need to access a software controlled LED, sitting on a

sysctl filesystem ?

2012-06-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi folks, I find myself in a situation where I need to directly explore the sysctl(8) tree from my program. The tricky part is this: from `src/sbin/sysctl.c': /* * These functions uses a presently undocumented interface to the kernel * to walk the tree and get the type so it can print the

Re: sysctl filesystem ?

2012-06-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi folks, I find myself in a situation where I need to directly explore the sysctl(8) tree from my program. The tricky part

Re: sysctl filesystem ?

2012-06-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi folks, I find myself in a situation where I need to directly explore the sysctl(8) tree from my program. The tricky part is this: from `src

Re: sysctl filesystem ?

2012-06-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Boris Popov b...@freebsd.org wrote: On 26.06.2012 6:56, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: purpose. However, if I can avoid to re-design that wheel too, by getting access to scfs(4) code, I will.  It is interesting, that the old drive with this code are still alive

Re: fast bcopy...

2012-05-02 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Steven Atreju snatr...@googlemail.com wrote: Luigi Rizzo wrote: 2. apparently, bcopy is not the fastest way to copy memory. http://now.cs.berkeley.edu/Td/bcopy.html Pentium 166, Triton Chipset, EDO memory... ahem. - Arnaud Best Regards. Steven.

Re: Complete hang on 9.0-RELEASE

2012-04-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: [...] I reproduced the previous problem on 10-CURRENT

Re: Disabling an arbitrary device

2012-04-21 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: Il 20 aprile 2012 19:18, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com ha scritto: Hi, On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I will be bringing up an old thread there, but it would seem

Re: Complete hang on 9.0-RELEASE

2012-04-21 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: [...] I reproduced the previous problem on 10-CURRENT from r233917, on the following platform (here running 8.2-RELEASE): FreeBSD

Disabling an arbitrary device

2012-04-20 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, I will be bringing up an old thread there, but it would seem the situation did not evolve in the past 9 years. I have a machine running 7.1 whose UHCI controller is generating some interrupt storm: # vmstat -i interrupt total rate irq4: sio0

Re: Disabling an arbitrary device

2012-04-20 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I will be bringing up an old thread there, but it would seem the situation did not evolve in the past 9 years. I have a machine running 7.1 whose UHCI controller is generating some interrupt storm: # vmstat

Re: Complete hang on 9.0-RELEASE

2012-04-18 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, [for the record...] On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi folks, For the records, I was running some tests yesterday on top of a 9.0-RELEASE, amd64, kernel when

Re: Complete hang on 9.0-RELEASE

2012-04-16 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, [for the record...] On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi folks, For the records, I was running some tests yesterday on top of a 9.0-RELEASE, amd64, kernel when the box hanged. At the time of the hang, the box was running a process with about 2800

FreeBSD on recent Xeon E5

2012-04-11 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, I just booted FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE on a Xeon E5-1650 based platform. It would seems that the CPU handles by itself a lots of PCI functions which do not seem to be supported by FreeBSD. Here is the output of `pciconf -l' restricted to unhandled devices: none0@pci0:0:4:0: class=0x088000

Re: [RFT][patch] Scheduling for HTT and not only

2012-04-10 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, 2012/4/9 Alexander Motin m...@freebsd.org: [...] I have strong feeling that while this test may be interesting for profiling, it's own results in first place depend not from how fast scheduler is, but from the pipes capacity and other alike things. Can somebody hint me what except pipe

Re: [RFT][patch] Scheduling for HTT and not only

2012-04-10 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Alexander Motin m...@freebsd.org wrote: On 04/10/12 20:18, Alexander Motin wrote: On 04/10/12 19:58, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: 2012/4/9 Alexander Motinm...@freebsd.org: [...] I have strong feeling that while this test may be interesting for profiling

Re: Scheduler + IPC performance on FreeBSD 7.4, 8.2, 9.0 and -CURRENT

2012-04-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Florian Smeets f...@freebsd.org wrote: On 05.04.12 20:03, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi folks, Hi, Over the past months, I ran on a couple of unused box the `hackbench'[HACKBENCH] benchmark used by the Linux folks for tracking down various kind

Re: Scheduler + IPC performance on FreeBSD 7.4, 8.2, 9.0 and -CURRENT

2012-04-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: Il 05 aprile 2012 19:03, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com ha scritto: Hi folks, Over the past months, I ran on a couple of unused box the `hackbench'[HACKBENCH] benchmark used by the Linux folks for tracking down

Re: Scheduler + IPC performance on FreeBSD 7.4, 8.2, 9.0 and -CURRENT

2012-04-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: Il 06 aprile 2012 18:54, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com ha scritto: Hi, On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: Il 05 aprile 2012 19:03, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com ha scritto

Scheduler + IPC performance on FreeBSD 7.4, 8.2, 9.0 and -CURRENT

2012-04-05 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi folks, Over the past months, I ran on a couple of unused box the `hackbench'[HACKBENCH] benchmark used by the Linux folks for tracking down various kind of regression/improvement. `hackbench' is a scheduler + IPC test (socket xor pipe). It creates producers/consumers groups and let a variable

Re: [RFT][patch] Scheduling for HTT and not only

2012-04-05 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, [Sorry for the delay, I got a bit sidetrack'ed...] 2012/2/17 Alexander Motin m...@freebsd.org: On 17.02.2012 18:53, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Alexander Motinm...@freebsd.org  wrote: On 02/15/12 21:54, Jeff Roberson wrote: On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Alexander

Re: [CFT] modular kernel config

2012-02-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, 2012/2/27 Łukasz Wąsikowski luk...@wasikowski.net: W dniu 2012-02-22 23:31, Bjoern A. Zeeb pisze: You cannot ship that on by default for non-tecnical reasons in a kernel.   Please do not commit a kernel config that can be booted (no LINT cannot be booted) with these on without

Re: [CFT] modular kernel config

2012-02-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, 2012/2/27 Steve Wills swi...@freebsd.org: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/27/12 10:53, Łukasz Wąsikowski wrote: W dniu 2012-02-22 23:31, Bjoern A. Zeeb pisze: You cannot ship that on by default for non-tecnical reasons in a kernel.  Please do not commit a kernel

Re: [CFT] modular kernel config

2012-02-28 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, 2012/2/28 Łukasz Wąsikowski luk...@wasikowski.net: W dniu 2012-02-28 19:55, Arnaud Lacombe pisze: FLOWTABLE on 8.x crashed BGP routers (kern/144917). no crash dump, no backtrace, no follow-up whatsoever after 1 year and 2 years, what's your points ? You could really have chosen a better

Re: [RFT][patch] Scheduling for HTT and not only

2012-02-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Alexander Motin m...@freebsd.org wrote: On 02/15/12 21:54, Jeff Roberson wrote: On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Alexander Motin wrote: I've decided to stop those cache black magic practices and focus on things that really exist in this world -- SMT and CPU load.

Re: stable/9 still looking for packages at 9-current

2012-01-09 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote: On 9. Jan 2012, at 01:04 , Arnaud Lacombe wrote: So you are saying that FreeBSD is currently providing on ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub images tagged as being 9.0 RELEASE (with checksum provided), in a `releases

Re: stable/9 still looking for packages at 9-current

2012-01-09 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com wrote: On 9 January 2012 18:16, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: ok, I'm a stupid lazy user (obviously)... While browsing the ftp, I see 9.0 ISOs

Re: stable/9 still looking for packages at 9-current

2012-01-09 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com wrote: On 9 January 2012 18:16, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote: On 9. Jan 2012, at 01:04 , Arnaud Lacombe wrote: So you are saying

Re: stable/9 still looking for packages at 9-current

2012-01-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Peter fb...@peterk.org wrote: Hello,  Installed 9-RELEASE amd64, [...] Has 9.0 been released ? I cannot find any announcement, especially on freebsd-announce@, [9.0TODO] has not been updated, there is no ISO image in [0], but there is in [3], dated from Jan

Re: stable/9 still looking for packages at 9-current

2012-01-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote: On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 07:26:47PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Peter fb...@peterk.org wrote: Hello

Re: sysctl kern.ipc.somaxconn limit 65535 why?

2012-01-04 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Chuck Swiger cswi...@mac.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Dan The Man wrote: However, I'm not convinced that it is useful to do this.  At some point, you are better off timing out and retrying via exponential backoff than you are queuing hundreds of

Re: sysctl kern.ipc.somaxconn limit 65535 why?

2012-01-04 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Dan The Man d...@sunsaturn.com wrote: sunsaturn:~# sysctl -w kern.ipc.somaxconn=20 kern.ipc.somaxconn: 4096 sysctl: kern.ipc.somaxconn: Invalid argument sunsaturn:~# sysctl -w kern.ipc.somaxconn=65536 kern.ipc.somaxconn: 4096 sysctl:

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2012-01-04 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:16 PM, matt...@phoronix.com wrote: Thanks. My request for the person documenting the tunings also runs the benchmark to ensure expected behaviour. Why should you have to tune anything ? Did you tune the Oracle Server install ? If not, you should not have to

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-16 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, [resend on the ml, my bad] On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: 2011/12/16 Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com: Hi, On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:32 AM, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-15 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:32 AM, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Just saw this shot benchmark on Phoronix dot com today: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTAyNzA it might be worth highlighting that despite Oracle Linux 6.1 Server is using a kernel +

PAE broken on -current, likely broken on stable/9

2011-12-05 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, The kernel tree is utterly broken when PAE is enabled, it chokes [non-exclusively] on the following: dev/dpt/dpt_scsi.c:279: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size [-Wint-to-pointer-cast] dev/dpt/dpt_scsi.c:279: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size

Re: PAE broken on -current, likely broken on stable/9

2011-12-05 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi *, [I could have renamed the subject 1001 fancy ways to crash FreeBSD, but I'll avoid :)] On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The kernel tree is utterly broken when PAE is enabled, it chokes [non-exclusively] on the following: After finally having

Re: PAE broken on -current, likely broken on stable/9

2011-12-05 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The kernel tree is utterly broken when PAE is enabled, it chokes [non-exclusively] on the following: After finally having been able

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-12-01 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 14/11/2011 02:38 Arnaud Lacombe said the following: you (committers) I wonder how it would work out if you were made a committer and couldn't say you (committers) any more... :-) The real question is rather whether

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-13 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote: On 11/8/11 9:29 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: [...] However, if you want to know, my heart tends to be with BSDs. Unfortunately, it's a sad love-story where your Beloved keeps deceiving you day after day. You want

Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: 2011/11/7 Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com: Hi, On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 04

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote: On 11/8/11 10:49 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, To avoid future complaints about the fact that I would be only talk without action, I did implement what I suggested above. As it is quite a large patch-set, I

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: [cc list trimmed] on 08/11/2011 22:34 Attilio Rao said the following: 2011/11/8 Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com: To avoid future complaints about the fact that I would be only talk without action, I did implement

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: 2011/11/8 Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com: Hi, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: 2011/11/7 Arnaud

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: [cc list trimmed] on 08/11/2011 22:34 Attilio Rao said the following: 2011/11/8 Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com: To avoid future

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote: On 11/8/11 10:49 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, To avoid future complaints about the fact that I would be only talk without action, I did implement what I suggested above. As it is quite a large patch-set, I

Re: Using Instruction Pointer address in debug interfaces [Was: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]]

2011-11-08 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote: On 11/8/11 5:52 PM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Julian Elischerjul...@freebsd.org  wrote: On 11/8/11 10:49 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, To avoid future complaints about the fact

Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]

2011-11-07 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: 2011/11/7 Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com: Hi, On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 06:03:39PM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: Below is the KBI patch after

Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3

2011-11-07 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: [restored cc: to the original poster] on 02/11/2011 08:10 Benjamin Kaduk said the following: I am perhaps confused.  Last I checked, bsd.kmod.mk caused '-include opt_global.h' to be passed on the command line.  Is the

Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]

2011-11-07 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: I'm unsure if this replies to your concerns because you just criticize without making a real technical question in this post. I made comments

Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]

2011-11-07 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:45:38AM -0600, Alan Cox wrote: Ok.  I'll offer one final suggestion.  Please consider an alternative suffix to func.  Perhaps, kbi or KBI.  In other words, something that hints at the

Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]

2011-11-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 06:03:39PM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: Below is the KBI patch after vm_page_bits_t merge is done. Again, I did not spent time converting all in-tree consumers from the (potentially)

Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]

2011-11-06 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 07:22:51AM -0800, m...@freebsd.org wrote: On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:43 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding the _vm_page_lock() vs. vm_page_lock_func(), the mutex.h has

Re: request: merging if_ath_tx branch to HEAD

2011-11-03 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 31 October 2011 20:15, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: In any case, I do want to merge the ath 11n stuff into -9, so even if it's not done by 9.0, it'll be done shortly after. Given that RC1 is already out,

Re: FreeBSD 9.0 amd64 RC1 and KDE4

2011-10-26 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com wrote: The KDE4 in FreeBSD 9.0 RC1 amd64 is generating enormous amount of error messages during usage ( not visible on screen , but seen after Ctrl-Alt-F1 discontinuation of X ) . This is making it extremely

Re: /usr/src/sys/conf/kern.mk, line 10: Malformed conditional (${FREEBSD_GCC}), /usr/src/sys/conf/kern.mk, line 14: if-less endif

2011-10-24 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Hartmann, O. ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 10/24/11 00:38, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Oct 23, 2011, at 3:31 PM, Hartmann, O. wrote:   Kernel building fails since today when kernel gets compiled via CLANG:  

Re: aliasing (or renaming) kern.geom.debugflags

2011-10-23 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, 2011/10/7 Andrey V. Elsukov bu7c...@yandex.ru: On 07.10.2011 23:41, Glen Barber wrote: In my experience, without kern.geom.debugflags=16, the MBR will not be written to the memstick, leaving you with what would effectively be a coaster in the not-so-distant past. The problem is that

Re: ipmi(4)/isa woes

2011-10-21 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:19 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Tuesday, October 11, 2011 6:53:11 pm Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi folks, I've got a machine where ipmi(4) seem to be unable to fully

Re: possible mountroot regression

2011-10-20 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote: On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Oliver Pinter wrote: On 10/19/11, Olivier Smedts oliv...@gid0.org wrote: 2011/10/19 Marcel Moolenaar mar...@xcllnt.net:

Re: possible mountroot regression

2011-10-20 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Warren Block wbl

Re: [RFC] Enable nxstack by default

2011-10-18 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 09:30:56PM +0200, Oliver Pinter wrote: Hi all! I think, it's the time to enable the nxstack feature. Any comments, pros, cons? I dragged the change long enough for it to miss the 9.0.

Re: [RFC] Enable nxstack by default

2011-10-18 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 09:30:56PM +0200, Oliver Pinter wrote: Hi all! I think

Re: [RFC] Enable nxstack by default

2011-10-18 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Oliver Pinter oliver.p...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/18/11, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5

Re: [RFC] Enable nxstack by default

2011-10-18 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, 2011/10/18 Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com: On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 01:06:27PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Oliver Pinter oliver.p...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/18/11, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11

Re: [RFC] Prepend timestamp in msgbuf

2011-10-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org wrote: On Fri Oct 14 11, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Nali Toja nalit...@gmail.com wrote: Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org writes: On Fri Oct 14 11, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote

Re: [RFC] Prepend timestamp in msgbuf

2011-10-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org wrote: On Mon Oct 17 11, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org wrote: On Fri Oct 14 11, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Nali Toja

Re: [RFC] Prepend timestamp in msgbuf

2011-10-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Alexander Best arun...@freebsd.org wrote: On Fri Oct 14 11, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: [...] cc -c -O

[PATCH] Prepend timestamp in msgbuf

2011-10-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
fixed width Arnaud Lacombe (3): msgbuf(4): convert `msg_needsnl' to a bit flag msgbuf(4): add logic to prepend timestamp on new line msgbuf(4): add a sysctl to toggle timestamp prepend sys/kern/subr_msgbuf.c | 54 --- sys/sys/msgbuf.h

Re: [PATCH] Prepend timestamp in msgbuf

2011-10-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote: Hi Arnaud! * Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com, 20111017 22:41: +             buf[0] = '\0'; +             getnanouptime(ts); +             err = snprintf(buf, sizeof buf, [%zd.%.6ld] , +                 ts.tv_sec

Re: [PATCH] Prepend timestamp in msgbuf

2011-10-17 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Ed Schouten e...@80386.nl wrote: Ah, missed something. +             getnanouptime(ts); +             err = snprintf(buf, sizeof buf, [%zd.%.6ld] , +                 ts.tv_sec, ts.tv_nsec / 1000); It seems we also have a getmicrouptime(), which returns

  1   2   >