÷ Wed, 09.10.2002, × 10:17, Bruce Evans ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
On 08-Oct-2002 Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
÷ Tue, 08.10.2002, × 22:25, Maxime Henrion ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
- I'm not sure if using the context of the init process to do sysctl
calls is the right way
÷ Wed, 09.10.2002, × 01:03, Vladimir B. Grebenschikov ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
÷ Tue, 08.10.2002, × 22:25, Maxime Henrion ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
Hi
Attached diff introduces new ddb interface - access to sysctl interface
[...]
Looks like this would be very useful. I
Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
? Wed, 09.10.2002, ? 01:03, Vladimir B. Grebenschikov ???:
? Tue, 08.10.2002, ? 22:25, Maxime Henrion ???:
Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
Hi
Attached diff introduces new ddb interface - access to sysctl interface
[...]
Maxime Henrion wrote:
[...]
- There is a TOK_STRING_SIZE macro which defines the size of the the
db_tok_string variable. Use it instead of declaring several 1k
variables on the stack.
It is not token buffers - it is buffers for sysctl data interchange,
const 1024
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote:
What I meant in my previous mail is that you could malloc() these
objects instead of putting them on the stack. Also, you don't need
buffers that big since the size you need is bounded at max(sizeof(int),
TOK_STRING_SIZE), which is likely to be
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote:
What I meant in my previous mail is that you could malloc() these
objects instead of putting them on the stack. Also, you don't need
buffers that big since the size you need is bounded at max(sizeof(int),
TOK_STRING_SIZE),
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote:
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote:
What I meant in my previous mail is that you could malloc() these
objects instead of putting them on the stack. Also, you don't need
buffers that big since the size you need is
÷ Wed, 09.10.2002, × 16:23, Maxime Henrion ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Maxime Henrion wrote:
What I meant in my previous mail is that you could malloc() these
objects instead of putting them on the stack. Also, you don't need
buffers that big since the size
Hi
Attached diff introduces new ddb interface - access to sysctl interface
sysctl - read sysctl value
sysctlw - write sysctl value
Example:
Translate string to sysctl MIB:
db sysctlw 0.3 hw\.model
0xcd1aaeec: 6 2
db
Now get string by this MIB:
db sysctl 6.2 s
0xcd1ab24: Pentium
Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
Hi
Attached diff introduces new ddb interface - access to sysctl interface
[...]
Looks like this would be very useful. I have a few comments, mainly
about style though.
- There is a TOK_STRING_SIZE macro which defines the size of the the
db_tok_string
VERY COOL!
On 8 Oct 2002, Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
Hi
Attached diff introduces new ddb interface - access to sysctl interface
sysctl - read sysctl value
sysctlw - write sysctl value
Example:
Translate string to sysctl MIB:
db sysctlw 0.3 hw\.model
0xcd1aaeec:
÷ Tue, 08.10.2002, × 22:25, Maxime Henrion ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
Hi
Attached diff introduces new ddb interface - access to sysctl interface
[...]
Looks like this would be very useful. I have a few comments, mainly
about style though.
Attached fixed patch
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
On 08-Oct-2002 Vladimir B. Grebenschikov wrote:
÷ Tue, 08.10.2002, × 22:25, Maxime Henrion ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
- I'm not sure if using the context of the init process to do sysctl
calls is the right way to go. However, it is not very clear what you
13 matches
Mail list logo
