On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 06:29:15PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:29:28AM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 03:04:07PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
Hi folks,
E.B. Dreger wrote:
[ ... wrapped fd using functions in libc_r ... ]
So it's a thunk/kludge not only to enforce proper
behavior, but also to prevent the process from blocking
and stalling other threads? This makes sense.
It also permits locks on the descriptors, to ensure
that one thread
vinu pattery wrote:
Could some body let me know, how to hack the FReeBSD kernel
to learn the exact sequence of steps which happen when the
device driver interrupts the FreeBSD Kernel for resources.
Is there a trace debugger available, with which i can find
out the steps.
It's not clear
http://freshmeat.net/projects/ngpt
http://www.sharma-home.net/~adsharma/projects/freebsd/ngpt-1.0.0-freebsd.tar.gz
Notes:
- The project has gotten more Linux specific since the last port (0.9.4)
There are a lot of ugly hacks that need cleanup.
- Please commit 27489 to help this port
- There
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:48:21PM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Nicolas Souchu wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a char driver that must be opened by more than one process. The minor
index is not sufficient for this. Is there any process private data (void *)
in the devfs
rod person wrote:
here is my ppp.conf. also try using ppxp from the ports, which is
what I use in X.
either way I have no problems
Rod
My ppp.conf file is pretty much identical to yours, the only difference
being that I don't have the ident user-ppp VERSION (built
COMPILATIONDATE)
rod person wrote:
here is my ppp.conf. also try using ppxp from the ports, which is
what I use in X.
either way I have no problems
Rod
My ppp.conf file is pretty much identical to yours, the only difference
being that I don't have the ident user-ppp VERSION (built
Hi,
Six million *.rpm files later, I've finally got the Linux version of
Mozilla working properly. However, neither the Linux versions of Mozilla
or Opera seem to be able use my PPP connection - they simply can't
connect to anything, even when I'm fully connected and browsing using
the FreeBSD
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Nicolas Souchu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:48:21PM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Nicolas Souchu wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a char driver that must be opened by more than one process. The minor
index is not sufficient for this. Is there
Jason Borkowsky wrote:
I am looking to find a simple way to control a serial port through BSD
(such as raising and lowering DTR for a specified duration). I thought I
had it using ioctl() and wrote a simple program to test it, but it seems I
don't have a full understanding of
Nicolai Petri wrote:
Hi hackers,
I've used some time writing a custom natd like daemon which makes som
speciel packet processing.
One of the issues with the natd approach is the large amount of
context-switches it gives.
This can be a real performance problem on very loaded networks.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 10:55:39AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 6/28/01 11:16:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Really? Have you even looked at the net4501 board which was mentioned?
It's
a single-board computer constructed for some
(Warning: rather long message)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:50:30 -0700
From: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[ ... wrapped fd using functions in libc_r ... ]
[ fd locking, to prevent chopping feet from beneath ]
As-needed serialization to prevent breakage = proper behavior.
I should have
thank you - this was helpful. One last question - when you say that
bridging cannot work with wi cards because they do not support promiscuous
transmission, this makes me wonder two things:
1. Do you mean the wi driver does not support this, or you mean the actual
physical card itself is
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 03:19:47PM +, E.B. Dreger wrote:
The threads scheduler is in user space. It converts a
blobking call into a non-blocking call plus a context
switch. THus blocking _IS_ a problem.
Bad wording on my part again; perhaps a problem that I [think
that] I have
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:33:52 +0300
From: Peter Pentchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The threads scheduler is in user space. It converts a
blobking call into a non-blocking call plus a context
switch. THus blocking _IS_ a problem.
Bad wording on my part again; perhaps a problem that I
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 09:05:25AM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
With the current license, this won't be installed as part of the base
kernel. (GPL and/or LGPL)
I understand it'll continue to be a port. Am I hearing that it is
unacceptable even as a temporary solution because of the license ?
(Cross-posting again... I'm willing to be larted with a herring if this is
unacceptable for the content presented.)
I was thinking about CPU affinity on SMP systems the following is
on-list brainstorming.
Take a two-way box running 10 httpd and 10 smtpd processes. Assuming
equal CPU time
With the current license, this won't be installed as part of the base
kernel. (GPL and/or LGPL)
I understand it'll continue to be a port. Am I hearing that it is
unacceptable even as a temporary solution because of the license ?
It's been answered time and time again over the past
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 03:44:03PM +, E.B. Dreger wrote:
Again, I am *not* using pthreads. Worker thread = totally separate
process, created via rfork(2). One process blocks, others continue
running.
I can't see how you make shure that on SMP systems all CPUs have
the same meaning from
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:33:51 +0200
From: Bernd Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can't see how you make shure that on SMP systems all CPUs have
the same meaning from memory content.
Normaly you would use a mutex or similar before accessing a data range
from another thread which also enshures
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 06:44:29PM +, E.B. Dreger wrote:
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:33:51 +0200
From: Bernd Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can't see how you make shure that on SMP systems all CPUs have
the same meaning from memory content.
Normaly you would use a mutex or similar
(Personal CCs trimmed; back to Bernd and cross-posting -smp and -hackers)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:18:18 +0200
From: Bernd Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Passing a token between threads. When a thread has the token, it may
assert a lock or a mutex on an object. Again, I subscribe to threads
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:14:58 -0700
From: Matthew Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why not just use First in line, Next processor available ? Then you
wouldn't care what processor did which task.
That was my question: Would the added complexity of CPU affinity
hinting be worth the reduction in
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
E.B. Dreger wrote:
If you need kernel threads, look at the Linux kernel
threads in the ports collection (it's a kernel module
that builds and installs as a package). You probably
don't, since performance of kernel threads is really only
about a
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 09:14:06PM +, E.B. Dreger scribbled:
| Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:14:58 -0700
| From: Matthew Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The issue is a lot more complicated than what you think.
This actually is a big issue in our future SMP implementation.
There are two types of
if I wish to use Kgdb, I build the kernel with the following set of steps from
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/kernelconfig-building.html
Since I make my own modifications to the source code I do the following
Change to the /usr/src directory
# cd /usr/src
Compile
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:44:43 -0500
From: Michael C . Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The issue is a lot more complicated than what you think.
How so? I know that idleproc and the new ipending / threaded INTs
enter the picture... and, after seeing the HLT benchmark page, it
would appear that simply
Quick question(s):
1. Is AIO SMP-safe?
2. If not, how could one force coherency? (Read and rewrite locked
a word from each cache line?) Is it worth the effort, or should
one not use AIO across process boundaries?
I'm asking primarily about 4.x, unless anyone has good guesses of
how 5.x
On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:47:49AM +, E.B. Dreger scribbled:
| 1. Is AIO SMP-safe?
AIO is not safe, SMP or not.
| 2. If not, how could one force coherency? (Read and rewrite locked
|a word from each cache line?) Is it worth the effort, or should
|one not use AIO across process
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:32:50PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
Wes Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The description there isn't very forthcoming. fastforwarding caches
the results of a route lookup for destination addresses that are not
on the local machine, and uses the cached
31 matches
Mail list logo
