In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
:I'm pretty sure you only need to 'goto restart' if you call into
:maybe_resched() as someone else may have manipulated the queues.
:
:The 'restart' label is only in there for restarting in case one of
:the functions called may
On Sun, Jun 23, 2002 at 06:42:43PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
The code works simply because it relies TAILQ_REMOVE() not changing
the tqe_next pointer. I suppose that this should either be documented,
or the loop changed back to use a temp
I have an IBM box that has a dual LSI 53c1030 controller on the
motherboard. Our SYM driver doesn't appear to have support for
this device; under Linux it is supported by a Fusion/MPT driver
from LSI.
Any chance of getting a driver for this chip?
--
Jonathan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Quoting Sergey Babkin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
John Capo wrote:
21:41:49.001039 client.4427 server.22: P 144:192(48) ack 12937 win
17376 nop,nop,timestamp 53827954 105528895 (DF) [tos 0x10]
21:41:49.001073 server.22
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 04:28:32PM -0600, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
* Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [011130 16:02] wrote:
Packet loss will screw up TCP performance no matter what you do.
NewReno, assuming it is working properly, can improve performance
for that case but
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 12:51:11AM -0700, Nate Williams wrote:
Note, some of the performance issues were made better by disabling the
TCP newreno implementation, but it's still poor and very inconsistent
for hosts not on the local network, while the Linux box next to it gets
much more
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
What happend at Intel? Their driver is even released under the
BSD license! (and the Linux one under the GPL)
Many Intel software products are released under a BSD-like license.
Consider the ACPI CA codebase we use.
The
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 06:05:01PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
What happend at Intel? Their driver is even released under the
BSD license! (and the Linux one under the GPL)
Many Intel
I just MFC'd it.
--
Jonathan
On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 10:19:48AM +0200, Danny Braniss wrote:
will th gx driver be MFC'ed any time soon? I have a box and a card
sitting around, and was wondering ...
thanks,
danny
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
I am not an official FreeBSD commiter, so I can't tell really...
Therefore jlemon was in cc: (he is the fxp driver maintainer), so it is
his call.
Nevertheless, I think this patch needs a little bit more testing - there
are many
This patch adds support for multiple simultaneous low level consoles
to the kernel. In essence, it is equivalent to the -D flag in the
/boot.config file.
Support can be turned on by executing 'boot -D' from the loader, or
by using the comcontrol program (which is appended to the end of the
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
What would be the best way to allocate:
1) a VM page whose physical address falls within a certain boundary, and
2) a VM object whose pages are contiguous in physical address space?
Background:
The !@*%^*!#^%*!#^$!@ Intel
, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
What would be the best way to allocate:
1) a VM page whose physical address falls within a certain boundary, and
2) a VM object whose pages are contiguous in physical address space?
Background
On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 08:22:23PM +0200, Guido van Rooij wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2001 at 12:55:12AM -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
jlemon 2001/09/28 22:55:04 PDT
Modified files:
sys/conf majors
sys/net
On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 01:01:20AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
Jonathan Lemon wrote:
I'm trying to use the TCPIP checksum offload capability of the Netgear
GA620 NIC from a SMP FreeBSD 4.2R system running on a typical PIII SBC.
I did enable TCPIP cksum offload for receive operations
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
Hello,
I'm trying to use the TCPIP checksum offload capability of the Netgear
GA620 NIC from a SMP FreeBSD 4.2R system running on a typical PIII SBC.
I did enable TCPIP cksum offload for receive operations by setting the
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alfred Perlstein) writes:
there's a setsockopt for this called TCP_NODELAY in netinet/tcp.h.
you should read further into stevens before posting such questions.
I seem to have expressed myself really bad
On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 12:43:15PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
just set the MTU on the sender to something really small (120 byres)
No. The data gets coalesced in the socket receive buffer on the other
end, remember? So depending on how fast things are running, there may
or may not be
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 09:07:00PM +0200, Milon Papezik wrote:
Hi all,
I need to MFC changes in ida driver, which start backround
firmware processing on Integrated SmartArray controllers
(this allows automatic on-line rebuild of failed drives).
I am going to do it in next few days. I
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
sure. my impression with the rainbow guys was, that they are very open
to the opensource community. they supplied a board, (user) docs and the
unreleased driver/openssl code to us and i was very impressed about
their attitude
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Hi,
Thanks for the responses so far. First, let me say that I'm a hardware
guy, and don't know all the details of FreeBSD's network stack.
There is two common kind of hardware encryption acceleration, and I
think they're being
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Hi,
There has been some talks earlier about importing the OpenBSD code for
encryption hardware support.
As I now has prototypes avaliable of low cost PCI and MiniPCI boards,
moving to production in a couple of weeks, I would
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
You've misinterpreted the paper. :(
Sorry, I got the reference wrong. I was referring to a
recently published HP paper[1] which concluded that contrary
to conventional wisdom, even a select based server can
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
Hi
Go to http://www.uspto.gov/patft/, search for patent number 5873127, and
you will find the description of mapping page table entries into virtual
memory via one page directory entry pointing to the page directory itself
-
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:53:33AM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
So it looks like we have prior art by around 6 years, which would
invalidate the patent iff it was the same thing.
Does it mean that the algorithm is free to use by everyone or free to use
only in freebsd? I would like to
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
This thread is baffling. The bottom line is that you cant trust data coming
into your machine, and you have to checksum it. The link level check only
verifies that what was sent by the last forwarding point is the same as what
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Hi -hackers,
Just a quick question.
What value of __FreeBSD_version should I require for kqueue? (I mean
osreldate.h) - was it introduced in 4.1 or 4.2 (memory fails me)?
It was introduced with 4.1; I believe the correct
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
I've been looking to start using the KEvent system and I've been
experimenting with it. However I've been having several problems, with my
own code as well as samples from http://www.flugsvamp.org.
AAARGH. /me hastily goes
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
When booting FreeBSD 4.x on a system board with onboard fxp ethernet we
developed for a research project here, we observe the same behaviour as
described in the Dec 2000 -hackers thread "RE: yet another unsupported
PHY in fxp
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 04:08:39PM +0100, Olibert Obdachlos wrote:
If I may ask, this binary driver, which cards does it support and
which cards does it *not* support? Or if releasing that info is
restricted by the NDA, does your driver support the newer Intel
Pro/1000 F cards, which had
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
She need's specific information that we need that we cant get
unless we sign NDA's for the doc's so she can try and get them merged into
a reference product somewhere between the datasheet (worthless) and the
programming
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
btw- *I* have no problem with an NDA as long as it includes a rider that says
what we could release as open source.
Hah, me neither. In fact, if you want to try out a binary of my
Intel GigE driver, it is at
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 10:39:58AM -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote:
I hate to say it, but anything that gets axed out of the manual basically
means that those features of the chip will not be used. I honestly don't
think that the marketer you talked to really understands this; I can't
for
I would like anyone who has a fxp card which doesn't work with
the current driver to contact me in order to test out an alternate
driver.
--
Jonathan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 04:44:38PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
At 02:45 PM 03/12/2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
I would like anyone who has a fxp card which doesn't work with
the current driver to contact me in order to test out an alternate
driver.
--
Jonathan
in case you havent read my posts
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
As a newcomer to this, I'm a little confused. There's a slew
of datasheets at Intel's web site
http://www.intel.com/design/network/datashts/index.htm
that don't seem to require NDA. (Just this week, I used the
82559
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Perhaps someone else would like to take over maintenance of the fxp
driver for awhile? That would be the reasonable and logical thing to
do, and if they do a good job of it DG might even be inclined to just
leave it in their
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
I really dont care to ask this on the list, but DG doesnt answer my private
emails, so I have little choice.
has any progress been made on making the if_fxp driver work with the latest
intel NICs? Its been over 3
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 05:23:09PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
At 12:18 PM 03/07/2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
I really dont care to ask this on the list, but DG doesnt answer my private
emails, so I have little choice
On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 03:15:43PM -0500, Trent Nelson wrote:
I'd just like to confirm that my interpretation of how kevent()
can be made to handle signals is correct.
From kqueue(2):
...
EVFILT_SIGNAL
Takes the signal number to monitor as the identifier and
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:12:42PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
At 10:58 PM 01/24/2001, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
I'll look into the Linux driver, however, and see if it has anything
useful in it. Historically the Linux
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 02:00:47PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
The case with the intel driver is the "ASSumption" that
its been done correctly and that the procedures for using the functions
available are correct.
Bahwhahahahah. Right. Yeah, right.
--
Jonathan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
I'll look into the Linux driver, however, and see if it has anything
useful in it. Historically the Linux Pro/100+ driver has totally sucked and
was chalk-full of magic numbers being anded and ored.
That's "chock
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
Reading some documents and sources I came to the following conclusion:
We support 4 Kbyte pages and 4 Mbyte pages, but we do not support 2
Mbyte pages. On IA-32 at least.
Is there a reason to?
I could understand that some
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 11:54:57AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
moved to hackers, dropped linux-kernel and -chat.
* Dan Kegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001024 21:38] wrote:
Johnathan,
Thanks for running that test for me! I've added your results
(plus a cautionary note about microbenchmarks
On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 01:46:26PM -0400, Marc Tardif wrote:
If I initiate multiple aio_read requests on sockets, how can
I set a timeout for each request? If I call aio_waitcomplete,
that sets a timeout for all. So, if I have 5 aio_reads, I
would call aio_waitcomplete as many times in a loop
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Is there a way to make VM86 interrupt calls from userland? The reason I'm
asking is that in order to get my video card (Savage/IX) working in X
properly, I need to make a couple of VESA int10 calls (or somehow obtain
the
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
We already have a pretty complete implementation of the Linux kernel ABI -
most of the problems with running Linux binaries on FreeBSD comes from
userland stuff: missing libraries, etc. It's not "Linux emulation" - see
I have a set of patches which allows offloading checksums to
NICs which support it (right now, only the Alteon based cards).
The patch is at http://www.freebsd.org/~jlemon/csum.patch.
Note that the alpha bits are currently untested.
--
Jonathan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/2325232027$[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
FWIW, Win2000 has a mechanism for dealing with what they call task
offloading. If you decide to attack the problem, an inexpensive device you
can use for testing is the 3C905B; it does IP+TCP checksums.
Yes,
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
From: Jonathan Lemon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 13:35:53 -0600
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Request for review (HW checksum patches)
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i
Delivered-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 09:25:33PM -0500, Keith Stevenson wrote:
On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 06:56:42PM -0600, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
The patches I have were designed to solve a single problem, just
checksum offloading. There are enough bits left in the new flag field
that you could use
I asked Sue to get a ktrace of the syslogd, and here's the
output:
18869 syslogd 954045445.977145 PSIG SIGALRM caught handler=0x804b068 mask=0x0
code=0x0
18869 syslogd 954045445.977343 RET poll -1 errno 4 Interrupted system call
18869 syslogd 954045445.977366 CALL
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
Something that the old DEC took a few stabs at was the idea of a
"checkpoint" feature where a process or a series of processes could be
put in a quiesced state. This would page out the process or processes
into the swap space,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 12:42:19PM -0700, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
It doesn't currently seem to boot with the RCC chipset. I get
the following:
pci unknown vendor = 0x9005, dev = 0x00cf
That's an Adaptec vendor ID. (They've got 0x9004 and 0x9005.) I'm not
sure what device that
On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 02:56:51PM -0500, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Damn. I was hoping that the Dell docs were something approaching
correct. The claim is one 7890 one 7880 on-board.
What is it really? a 7880 a 7899, or something else?
Uh, I didn't say that this was a PowerEdge 2400,
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
I've copied a first cut of an Intel Pro/1000 Gigabit driver for freebsd to:
http://www.freebsd.org/~mjacob/FreeBSD_Intel_Gige.patch.gz
Um, no offense, but why didn't you coordinate with me earlier
about this? I did tell you
On Dec 12, 1999 at 03:55:18PM -0800, Jason Nordwick wrote:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
In my case, load is reasonably distributed. Is poll() really that much
better than select()? I thought that, excepting bit flag manipulations,
it worked
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
My school has recently acquired a Compaq Proliant 2500 and we are trying
to set up FreeBSD on it. I download the 3.3 kern and mfsroot disks and
replaced the kernel with a custom one that had the IDA driver included
in it.
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
There is alot of talk going on over at the linux-kernel mailing list
about implementing synchronous messaging for I/O. They are talking about
a paper that was presented at USENIX:
On Sep 09, 1999 at 06:49:46PM -0700, Jayson Nordwick wrote:
Yes. I don't particularly like some of the things in the paper,
although it does have several good concepts. I have an implementation
that does exactly this, and have a line on two other implementations
that do the same thing (but
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19990909003757.66140.qm...@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu
you write:
There is alot of talk going on over at the linux-kernel mailing list
about implementing synchronous messaging for I/O. They are talking about
a paper that was presented at USENIX:
On Sep 09, 1999 at 06:49:46PM -0700, Jayson Nordwick wrote:
Yes. I don't particularly like some of the things in the paper,
although it does have several good concepts. I have an implementation
that does exactly this, and have a line on two other implementations
that do the same thing (but
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19990902233418$[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
Features=0x1bfFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,MCE,CX8
Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19990902233418$5...@fish.pcs you write:
CPU: Pentium/P54C (132.73-MHz 586-class CPU)
Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x52c Stepping=12
Features=0x1bfFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,MCE,CX8
Seems more precise and informative. For 386/486 based hardware
someone
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
Heres what suns web page says:
"Our aim is to .com office productivity. We are publishing the StarOffice
specifications and will make the source code available through the Sun
Community Source Licensing program to encourage
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/8a24adf3.24fe9...@aol.com you write:
Heres what suns web page says:
Our aim is to .com office productivity. We are publishing the StarOffice
specifications and will make the source code available through the Sun
Community Source Licensing program to
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/199908070635.aaa07...@harmony.village.org you
write:
In message pine.bsf.4.10.9908070138180.9444-100...@janus.syracuse.net Brian
F. Feldman writes:
: You can always use off_t with %qd, (int64_t)foo.
But that isn't portbale. %qd is a bsdism. %lld and %llu
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
-hackers,
As docs/12220 points out;
We want to extract routing information by specifying a particular
destination IP address. The man page on Route and Rtentry mention
that this information can be acquired using
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19990804165905.a16...@kilt.nothing-going-on.org
you write:
-hackers,
As docs/12220 points out;
We want to extract routing information by specifying a particular
destination IP address. The man page on Route and Rtentry mention
that this
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/199907151825.laa11...@apollo.backplane.com you
write:
::-s Print summary information about total swap
:: space usage and availability:
::
:: allocated The total amount of swap space
::
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/199907142021.naa01...@dingo.cdrom.com
you write:
delayed ack sounds interesting
Turning that off disables TCP slow-start. It's a huge performance
booster for things like SMB service, where you have lots of short-lived
TCP connections on a local
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
response, it kicks you out. Basically, to use a well connected irc server,
you *must* run an identd that returns a valid username response, and that
username is used in your conversations. Some servers will let you on
without a
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19990711203203.b320...@overcee.netplex.com.au you
write:
response, it kicks you out. Basically, to use a well connected irc server,
you *must* run an identd that returns a valid username response, and that
username is used in your conversations. Some
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED] you
write:
Hi,
The following program returns an inconsistant rc/errno value.
Setting a bit corresponding to filedescriptor which is not open
is only found when it is less than 20. ie:
This is because initially, only 20 descriptors are
On Jul 07, 1999 at 02:33:19PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Not unless you want to blow up virtually every program that uses select!!!
Passing an nd parameter that is greater then the current number of
descriptors is perfectly valid. It's setting a bit in the bitmask for
one
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/199907082010.qaa06...@bb01f39.unx.sas.com you
write:
Hi,
The following program returns an inconsistant rc/errno value.
Setting a bit corresponding to filedescriptor which is not open
is only found when it is less than 20. ie:
This is because initially,
On Jul 07, 1999 at 02:33:19PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
Not unless you want to blow up virtually every program that uses select!!!
Passing an nd parameter that is greater then the current number of
descriptors is perfectly valid. It's setting a bit in the bitmask for
one
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/m111mgq-...@bert.kts.org you write:
Hi,
perhaps i don't see the wood for trees.
I'd like to write a driver for a PCI ISDN chipset which uses a 32k byte
memory window as a sort of dual ported ram in the memory address space.
What has to be done in the
On Jul 07, 1999 at 11:41:35AM -0400, Zach Brown wrote:
Well, how about the kernel passes siginfo and siginfo_cancel events
up to userland, siginfo will remove any siginfo's from its buffer
that it sees a siginfo_cancel event for -- naturally we need a flag
to tell siginfo when to poll for
On Jul 07, 1999 at 10:25:12PM -0400, Brian Dean wrote:
OK, I did that. What is the convention for naming the flags? The
only one in use for that set of flags is FP_SOFTFP. I'm currently
using PCB_DBREGS, but I but I easily change the name to whatever
convention dictates - please advise.
On Jul 07, 1999 at 11:41:35AM -0400, Zach Brown wrote:
Well, how about the kernel passes siginfo and siginfo_cancel events
up to userland, siginfo will remove any siginfo's from its buffer
that it sees a siginfo_cancel event for -- naturally we need a flag
to tell siginfo when to poll for
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/199907061636.jaa15...@vashon.polstra.com you write:
In article 199907050103.saa51...@bubba.whistle.com,
Archie Cobbs arc...@whistle.com wrote:
A new, faster event notification system would be great. But don't forget
to include *all* events, not just file
On Jul 07, 1999 at 10:25:12PM -0400, Brian Dean wrote:
OK, I did that. What is the convention for naming the flags? The
only one in use for that set of flags is FP_SOFTFP. I'm currently
using PCB_DBREGS, but I but I easily change the name to whatever
convention dictates - please advise.
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:10:38AM -0400, Zach Brown wrote:
the sigio/siginfo model is a few orders of magnitude cheaper than
poll/select as you scale the number of fds you're watching. The reasons
for this being that select()/poll() have that large chunk of state to
throw around every syscall,
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:10:38AM -0400, Zach Brown wrote:
the sigio/siginfo model is a few orders of magnitude cheaper than
poll/select as you scale the number of fds you're watching. The reasons
for this being that select()/poll() have that large chunk of state to
throw around every syscall,
On Jul 07, 1999 at 11:15:13AM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
In essence, I want to move the large struct pollfd array that I
have into the kernel, and then instruct the kernel to add/remove
entries from this array, and only return the array subset which
has activity.
How does the kernel
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/199907041453.kaa03...@dean.pc.sas.com yo
u write:
This is not as efficent as it could be implemented with a separate
flag to indicate whether saving the debug registers is necessary since
loading/storing the debug registers is fairly expensive (11 clocks on
an
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:37:13PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote:
I'd like to open discussion on adding a new interface to FreeBSD,
specifically, a variant of poll().
The problem is that poll() (and select(), as well) do not scale
well as the number of open file descriptors increases. When there
On Jul 07, 1999 at 12:04:35PM +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
"Brian F. Feldman" wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/Pine.LNX.3.95.990702160538.27513C-10
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
now supports the select() and poll() sy
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:51:28PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Saturday, 3 July 1999 at 23:10:29 -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Jul 07, 1999 at 12:04:35PM +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
Is there interest in doing something like this in general?
YES! As a matter of fact, I've done something
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:01:07AM -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
poll() is faster (it doesn't have to do bit twiddling), and it's interface
is cleaner (it can report invalid fd's, something select() can't do). As
its functionality is a superset
On Jul 07, 1999 at 11:27:57AM -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:01:07AM -0400, Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
As for new code, use whichever you are comfortable with. Personally, I
On Jul 07, 1999 at 12:04:35PM +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
Brian F. Feldman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/Pine.LNX.3.95.990702160538.27513C-10
0...@crb.crb-web.com you write:
now supports the select() and poll() system calls
On Jul 07, 1999 at 01:51:28PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
On Saturday, 3 July 1999 at 23:10:29 -0500, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
On Jul 07, 1999 at 12:04:35PM +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
Is there interest in doing something like this in general?
YES! As a matter of fact, I've done something
Apr 1999 17:42:02 -0500
From: Jonathan Lemon jle...@cs.wisc.edu
To: freebsd-a...@freebsd.org
I'd like to open discussion on adding a new interface to FreeBSD,
specifically, a variant of poll().
The problem is that poll() (and select(), as well) do not scale
well as the number of open file
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/pine.lnx.3.95.990702160538.27513c-100...@crb.crb-web.com
you write:
now supports the select() and poll() system calls. My question is really one
of usage. Why would one us poll() over select()? Is select eventually going
to go away for some reason?
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Jonathan Lemon was heard blurting out:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
I don't seem to see support for GRE (IP-in-IP encaspulation) in FreeBSD
(although I might
In article local.mail.freebsd-hackers/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
you write:
Personally, I think we should use a kernel environment variable passed in
from loader, since kern_envp is available *real early*, from the very
beginning of init386(), which is called form locore just after going
virtual. It
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/19990630153542.a31...@lunatic.oneinsane.net you
write:
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Jonathan Lemon was heard blurting out:
In article
local.mail.freebsd-hackers/pine.bsf.4.05.9906301438450.10384-100...@medulla.hippocampus.net
you write:
I don't seem to see
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
