Hi Kostik,
Thanks to b.f., I've been reminded that this patch has yet to be
committed :).
As a reminder, here are the archive pointers to the discussion:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2010-August/032549.html
continued...
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2010
On Wednesday 01 June 2011 01:40 am, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 31/05/2011 23:16 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
> > On Tuesday 31 May 2011 07:18 am, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >> on 24/05/2011 20:56 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
> >>> I think it's about time to enable invariant TSC timecounter on
> >>>
> > I have reports that indicate that this problem also seems to exist on
> > 7.3-RELEASE-p4 amd64
> > and 8.1-RELEASE i386. The above program does not segfault on my 8.2-STABLE
> > amd64.
>
> Can you recheck it for 8.1? It should not be so.
Yes, you're right. On 8.1 there is no problem. So th
On 1 June 2011 19:27, Klaus T. Aehlig wrote:
>
> [Please CC me, as I'm not subscribed to this list]
>
> Hallo,
>
> while dealing with PR ports/157274 [1], I found that the following
> program cause a segmentation fault on 7.3-RELEASE amd64, even though
> my understanding of the man page of fdopend
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:27:13PM +0100, Klaus T. Aehlig wrote:
>
> [Please CC me, as I'm not subscribed to this list]
>
> Hallo,
>
> while dealing with PR ports/157274 [1], I found that the following
> program cause a segmentation fault on 7.3-RELEASE amd64, even though
> my understanding of
Hello Hackers,
I think I found a bug in ksched_setscheduler() function.
178 int
179 ksched_setscheduler(struct ksched *ksched,
180 struct thread *td, int policy, const struct sched_param *param)
181 {
182 int e = 0;
183 struct rtprio rtp;
184
185 switch(policy)
186
[Please CC me, as I'm not subscribed to this list]
Hallo,
while dealing with PR ports/157274 [1], I found that the following
program cause a segmentation fault on 7.3-RELEASE amd64, even though
my understanding of the man page of fdopendir(3) says it should not.
#include
#include
#include
On Tue, 31 May 2011 21:09:10 -0700
Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> On May 31, 2011, at 5:06 PM, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> >> Usually it is different only on segmented architectures like 16-bit
> >> x86.
> >>
> >
> > Not so on ia64, where they have special function descriptor type.
>
> Actually, n
I recently needed a new chip programmer for various hardware work
and since I know this is a recurring issue for people, I thought I
would share this information.
After researching the market, I decided to get the Galep5 from
the German company Conitec.net Price EUR 417 + sales tax
It's a nif
On Tue, 31 May 2011 m...@freebsd.org wrote:
I am looking into potentially MFC'ing r212367 and related, that adds
drains to sbufs. The reason for MFC is that several pieces of new
code in CURRENT are using the drain functionality and it would make
MFCing those changes much easier.
The problem i
On Wednesday 01 June 2011 01:07:29 m...@freebsd.org wrote:
> I am looking into potentially MFC'ing r212367 and related, that adds
> drains to sbufs. The reason for MFC is that several pieces of new
> code in CURRENT are using the drain functionality and it would make
> MFCing those changes much ea
11 matches
Mail list logo