hi, there!
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Alexander Langer wrote:
A "Developers Handbook", which will also cover device driver and
kernel module programming is in work under the leadership of Jeroen
Ruigrok van der Werven [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Once it has more
content I can imagine a print version of this.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Mike Smith wrote:
Hello there,
Under linux, PCI stuff is generally done thru set of pci* functions, while
under FreeBSD there are ioctls provided by pci driver. I've been doing
some code migration from linux to FreeBSD, and got thru most of it, except
for
David O'Brien wrote:
Monday. GCC 2.95.3 will hi 4-STABLE after April 1st. Heck, April 1st
might actually be the best day to do it. So if RELENG_4 is unfrozen by
then, that's when I'll MFC it. ;)
Hi,
I just posted the question in another thread:
Since at least aug. 2000 (according to the
Thomas Quinot [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Has anyone implemented/thought of implementing:
- a CAM transport for ATAPI devices;
- a CAM transport for USB scanners;
- the Linux SCSI generic device (/dev/sg*)?
FreeBSD already has an equivalent to the SCSI generic device -- take a
look at
Le 2001-03-19, Nat Lanza crivait :
FreeBSD already has an equivalent to the SCSI generic device -- take a
look at pass(4).
Yep, I am aware of pass(4), but some closed-source software that
comes only as Linux binaries insist on having a /dev/sg device
(which, under FreeBSD, would most likely
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Deslions Nicolas wrote:
Hi,
i'm trying to setup a 850Mb ramdrive but MFS seems limited ... i didn't
found any way to do something bigger than 500Mb
Any idea ?
You should increase "options MAXDSIZ=" in your kernel config file. See
LINT for further description.
***
Hello,
the FreeBSD TCP/IP stack uses the "system tick timer" for some delay
(maybe only for TCP).
you may want to use a HZ=1000 option (see the LINT config file) in a
recompiled kernel and see if things go better. (moreover, the dc(4)
driver which is used for your NIC has some interesting
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 02:54:52PM +0100, Titus von Boxberg wrote:
Since at least aug. 2000 (according to the mailing list
archives) the exception handling in base system g++ is broken
(at least for multithreaded programs)
I am not aware of exception handling being broken (more so than in
Hello,
I'm developping a network benchmark application ("packet blaster").
The current version uses many processes, to send and receive packets,
and collate statistics.
when I look at top(1), I see most of the time taken is in the "system"
category. I assume this is due to the many context
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Thierry Herbelot [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010319 11:43] wrote:
Hello,
I'm developping a network benchmark application ("packet blaster").
The current version uses many processes, to send and receive packets,
and collate statistics.
when I look at top(1), I see
* Thierry Herbelot [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010319 11:59] wrote:
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Thierry Herbelot [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010319 11:43] wrote:
Hello,
I'm developping a network benchmark application ("packet blaster").
The current version uses many processes, to send and
Freebsd-hackers:
Been trying to debug a program of mine and keep
running into these errors. I was wondering
if there is a problem with exceptions and gccor
with freebsd in general?? I think frame.c has to do with
exceptions.
What do you all think about all those cannot access
memory
I do have a small problem w/ serial IO. I have attached code to
1. open a serial line,
2. set terminal attributes,
3. close the serial port,
4. iterate thru 1.-3. a second time.
snip
/* serial test */
/*
FreeBSD 3 second
*/
#include stdio.h
#include string.h
#include unistd.h
#include
The stack trace looks pretty useless because of all these "cannot access
memory" messages. Anyway, it seems like your program is dying because of
unhandled exception. Either you did not provide the suitable try {} catch
construct or bug in GCC or your code prevents DWARF unwinder from finding
David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 02:54:52PM +0100, Titus von Boxberg wrote:
Since at least aug. 2000 (according to the mailing list
archives) the exception handling in base system g++ is broken
(at least for multithreaded programs)
I am not aware of exception handling
(moreover, the dc(4)
driver which is used for your NIC has some interesting performance
improvements in the forthcoming 4.3-Release)
like what ?
cheers
luigi
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
At 02:32 PM 03/19/2001, Thierry Herbelot wrote:
Hello,
the FreeBSD TCP/IP stack uses the "system tick timer" for some delay
(maybe only for TCP).
you may want to use a HZ=1000 option (see the LINT config file) in a
recompiled kernel and see if things go better. (moreover, the dc(4)
driver which
At 09:22 AM 03/19/2001, Mrten Wikstrm wrote:
I've performed a routing test between a FreeBSD box and a Linux box. I
measured the latency and the result was not what I had expected. Both
systems had the peak at 100 us (microseconds), but whereas the Linux box had
_no_ packet over 200 us, the
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 07:14:54PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
Cool. Is the 21143 now started in store-and-forward mode and has the
mandatory watchdog timeout been fixed? Im getting tired of hacking it every
release.
Submit a PR to fix the problem?
--
wca
PGP signature
At 07:20 PM 03/19/2001, Will Andrews wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 07:14:54PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
Cool. Is the 21143 now started in store-and-forward mode and has the
mandatory watchdog timeout been fixed? Im getting tired of hacking it
every
release.
Submit a PR to fix the problem?
I
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 07:46:53PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
I never got an answer (as usual) from bill paul when I made the
suggestions, and noone seemed interested in getting it fixed. He seems to
get insulted when I infer that he did something wrong.
It's like they say: "money talks".
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 04:32:36PM -0500, Alexander N. Kabaev wrote:
It there any particular reason why you are using gcc295 from ports
instead of FreeBSD stock compiler?
I would assume because he has a 3.4 box:
$ g++295 -v
specs from
On 19-Mar-2001 Titus von Boxberg wrote:
David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 02:54:52PM +0100, Titus von Boxberg wrote:
Since at least aug. 2000 (according to the mailing list
archives) the exception handling in base system g++ is broken
(at least for multithreaded programs)
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 08:12:18PM -0500, Alexander N. Kabaev wrote:
The fix has been posted on the gcc-devel mailing list and Berndt
Schmidt even included it into some of GCC 2.95.3-testXX release. And
that time I decided that my job is done, but apparently Berndt managed
to revert (most
Is there an easy way (from script ideally) to get the following
stats:
free physical mem (avail ram)
free swap
total avail mem
any two of the three would be great. If such a beast doesn't
exist, what are the easiest calls to use to get at them so I could
write some programs
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 06:11:55PM -0800, Devin Butterfield wrote:
I'm not defending Dennis here, but this statement infers that nothing gets
done unless maintainers are
a) paid
or
b) someone else does the work for them.
I certainly hope this is not the case.
No, it is not. My
Hello -hackers
When the kinfo_proc structure was introduced, the ps(1) manual page
was not updated. Thus, it still talks about keywords that don't
exist. Also, one line in ps.c was forgotten. The latter results in
an annoying warning when using ps(1) with the -j flag:
dd@ref5% ps -j
On 20-Mar-01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there an easy way (from script ideally) to get the following
stats:
free physical mem (avail ram)
free swap
total avail mem
any two of the three would be great. If such a beast doesn't
exist, what are the easiest calls to
Dennis wrote:
[SNIP]
If you are using the dc driver, make certain it is operating in
store-and-forward mode, the default configuration starts in a mode that
only works on 10mb/s connections.
patches ?
dennis
--
Thierry Herbelot
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On 20-Mar-01 Luigi Rizzo wrote:
is there any scanner (USB i presume by now) which is decently
supported by FreeBSD, perhaps something that can be driven
using a command line interface rather than SANE or some
other huge piece of software ?
Well, sane does have a command line tool :)
I
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Is there an easy way (from script ideally) to get the following
:stats:
:
:free physical mem (avail ram)
This is going to be quite small on any busy machine, or machine that has a
reasonable uptime. The VM system will cache things unless
: Is there an easy way (from script ideally) to get the following
:stats:
:
:free physical mem (avail ram)
This is going to be quite small on any busy machine, or machine that
has a reasonable uptime. The VM system will cache things unless
there's a demand for memory.
[snip]
triggers every second and steals too much cpu. So my
question is, how can I
decrease this routing delay?
Were you loading the interface, or just passing nominal
streams? What pps
did you pass through the box? Most likely the "delays" are
only seen when
the machine is close to
Mrten Wikstrm wrote:
[SNIP]
I'm using the de driver. Alas, the NICs seems quite old. They are 21140's.
I've only got one 21143. I think there is a 3COM 3c905b in the lab too.
Would it be better to use the 21143 + 3com than two 21140s?
definitely : in my packet blaster, I get an order of
I'm using the de driver. Alas, the NICs seems quite old. They are 21140's.
I've only got one 21143. I think there is a 3COM 3c905b in the lab too.
Would it be better to use the 21143 + 3com than two 21140s?
definitely : in my packet blaster, I get an order of magnitude less
packet drops
:total avail mem
Do you mean physical memory, in which case the value of hw.physmem will
tellyou.
Phys mem + swap, which I think I can calc pretty easily now
that I have swap. -sc
That's not actually a useful number either. 8)
Bear in mind, for example, that program text
36 matches
Mail list logo
