On Jul 31, 2011, at 9:59 PM, Bernard van Gastel wrote:
Hi all,
I want to reduce the number of syscalls for my networking application. The
app handles incoming connections with the 'accept()' system call. Is there a
way to specify to accept() that the newly created file descriptors should
on 01/08/2011 03:28 Mario Lobo said the following:
Hi to all
In my desktop machine, I had an AM2+ ASROCK mobo with Phenom II 955 BE that
showed each core temperature perfectly under FBSD 8-STABLE, via
dev.cpu.x.temp. amdtemp.ko loaded.
Unfortunately this Mobo died and only found AM3
On Monday 01 August 2011 10:14 am, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 01/08/2011 03:28 Mario Lobo said the following:
Hi to all
In my desktop machine, I had an AM2+ ASROCK mobo with Phenom II
955 BE that showed each core temperature perfectly under FBSD
8-STABLE, via dev.cpu.x.temp. amdtemp.ko
On Sunday 31 July 2011 08:28 pm, Mario Lobo wrote:
Hi to all
In my desktop machine, I had an AM2+ ASROCK mobo with Phenom II 955
BE that showed each core temperature perfectly under FBSD 8-STABLE,
via dev.cpu.x.temp. amdtemp.ko loaded.
Unfortunately this Mobo died and only found AM3 boards
[cc list trimmed]
on 01/08/2011 19:23 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
I gave up the DiodeOffset recently because a lot of BIOSes do not set
any meaningful values. Instead, I added a tunable for that. Please
see the attached patch, which is also available from here:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 09:28:29PM -0300 I heard the voice of
Mario Lobo, and lo! it spake thus:
Unfortunately this Mobo died and only found AM3 boards for which my
phenom 955 doesn't fit.
Not that it helps you now, but the 955 _is_ perfectly compatible with
AM3. It's only the initial 920
On Monday 01 August 2011 03:03 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
[cc list trimmed]
on 01/08/2011 19:23 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
I gave up the DiodeOffset recently because a lot of BIOSes do not
set any meaningful values. Instead, I added a tunable for that.
Please see the attached patch,
on 01/08/2011 22:48 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
amdtemp(4) attaches under PCI bus but its sibling on function 2 isn't
easy to address, i.e., hostbN.
pci_find_bsf() should help with that.
--
Andriy Gapon
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing
on 01/08/2011 22:48 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
I have mixed feeling about this because I own a system with such
CPU/motherboard combo, too. I also believe it works well but errata
is errata. If vendor says we shouldn't use it, then we shouldn't.
In fact, I am just following Linux as
On Monday 01 August 2011 04:10 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 01/08/2011 22:48 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
I have mixed feeling about this because I own a system with such
CPU/motherboard combo, too. I also believe it works well but
errata is errata. If vendor says we shouldn't use it,
On Monday 01 August 2011 04:07 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 01/08/2011 22:48 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
amdtemp(4) attaches under PCI bus but its sibling on function 2
isn't easy to address, i.e., hostbN.
pci_find_bsf() should help with that.
I thought about that but it seemed like an
On Monday 01 August 2011 15:52:30 Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 09:28:29PM -0300 I heard the voice of
Mario Lobo, and lo! it spake thus:
Unfortunately this Mobo died and only found AM3 boards for which my
phenom 955 doesn't fit.
Not that it helps you now, but the 955
On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 19:21:38 -0300
Mario Lobo wrote:
On Monday 01 August 2011 15:52:30 Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 09:28:29PM -0300 I heard the voice of
Mario Lobo, and lo! it spake thus:
Unfortunately this Mobo died and only found AM3 boards for which
my phenom
13 matches
Mail list logo
