Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On 10/26/15 19:03, John Baldwin wrote: On Monday, October 26, 2015 10:11:43 AM Hans Petter Selasky wrote: Hi, We have NO_MODULES for building kernel without modules, but no NO_KERNEL to only build the modules. What do you think about the following patch: diff --git a/sys/conf/kern.post.mk

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On 10/26/15 19:23, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:03:07AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: On Monday, October 26, 2015 10:11:43 AM Hans Petter Selasky wrote: Hi, We have NO_MODULES for building kernel without modules, but no NO_KERNEL to only build the modules. What do you

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On 10/27/15 13:16, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:31:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: I understand that the compilation environments are different. How would you suggest to build-test a handful of C-files under a single device keyword and associated kernel module

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On 10/27/15 13:16, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:31:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: I understand that the compilation environments are different. How would you suggest to build-test a handful of C-files under a single device keyword and associated kernel module

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:31:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > I understand that the compilation environments are different. > > How would you suggest to build-test a handful of C-files under a single > device keyword and associated kernel module cross all kernels we have in > a

Re: Depreciate and remove gbde

Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > On Oct 24, 2015, at 12:06 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: >> The thing I like most about encryption is that when I RMA a bad >> drive, I don't have to worry about my data leaking if I am unable >> to overwrite all the data... > You are optimistic if you

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 14:00 +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On 10/27/15 13:16, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:31:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky > > wrote: > > > I understand that the compilation environments are different. > > > > > > How would you suggest to

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 10:06:41 AM Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On 10/26/15 19:03, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Monday, October 26, 2015 10:11:43 AM Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> We have NO_MODULES for building kernel without modules, but no NO_KERNEL > >> to only build the

Re: Quick test building a module cross all targets and architectures

On 10/27/15 16:49, John Baldwin wrote: With MAKE_JUST_WORLDS you would only build a "generic" module once per architecture. That savings is likely far more than the cost of the additional tools. I will try it out. Thanks for your hints and tips. --HPS

Re: AHC - 29160 interrupts not functioning?

Michael Butler wrote: > Do you have "options AHC_ALLOW_MEMIO" in your kernel config? I'm running GENERIC on all of those machines, and as far as I can tell, that option is not enabled by default, at least on 10.1-RELEASE: # config -x /boot/kernel/kernel | grep -i ahc options

Re: AHC - 29160 interrupts not functioning?

On 10/27/15 13:50, Patrick Hess wrote: > Michael Butler wrote: >> Do you have "options AHC_ALLOW_MEMIO" in your kernel config? > > I'm running GENERIC on all of those machines, and as far as I can tell, > that option is not enabled by default, at least on 10.1-RELEASE: I discovered that there

Coverity down?

I just noticed that our last Coverity scan happened on either July-6 (according to my inbox) or June-26 (according to Coverity's website). Prior to that, we seemed to get scanned about once per week. Does anybody know why we haven't been scanned for so long? I can't figure out what triggers a

Re: AHC - 29160 interrupts not functioning?

Hi! > On 10/27/15 13:50, Patrick Hess wrote: > > Michael Butler wrote: > >> Do you have "options AHC_ALLOW_MEMIO" in your kernel config? > > > > I'm running GENERIC on all of those machines, and as far as I can tell, > > that option is not enabled by default, at least on 10.1-RELEASE: > > I

Re: AHC - 29160 interrupts not functioning?

On 10/27/15 16:50, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > Hi! > >> On 10/27/15 13:50, Patrick Hess wrote: >>> Michael Butler wrote: Do you have "options AHC_ALLOW_MEMIO" in your kernel config? >>> >>> I'm running GENERIC on all of those machines, and as far as I can tell, >>> that option is not enabled by

Re: HEADS-UP: Enabling WITH_DEBUG_FILES by default

On 11 February 2015 at 21:39, Glen Barber wrote: > Hi, > > Within the next 24 hours, I will merge the release-install-debug branch > into head, which will enable building and installing stripped debugging > files by default. > > In general, this should have no significant

Re: HEADS-UP: Enabling WITH_DEBUG_FILES by default

On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 06:09:37 PM Ed Maste wrote: > On 11 February 2015 at 21:39, Glen Barber wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Within the next 24 hours, I will merge the release-install-debug branch > > into head, which will enable building and installing stripped debugging > >

11.0-CURRENT r290039 privileged instruction fault while in kernel mode

I just got this crash while running poudriere on a freshly upgraded 11.0-CURRENT machine. The instruction pointer value looks pretty strange. FreeBSD zipper.catspoiler.org 11.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #30 r290039: Tue Oct 27 00:08:00 PDT 2015

Re: Coverity down?

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Alan Somers wrote: > I just noticed that our last Coverity scan happened on either July-6 > (according to my inbox) or June-26 (according to Coverity's website). > Prior to that, we seemed to get scanned about once per week. Does > anybody

Re: [CFT] Buildworld ccache support

Bryan Drewery wrote: > https://people.freebsd.org/~bdrewery/patches/world-ccache.diff In the Junos build - where we used ccache for quite some time I did: _CC := ${CC} CC = ${CCACHE_ENV} ${_CC} Since sometimes you want the compiler without ccache - eg when linking. That