On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:51:39PM +, Maya Rashish wrote:
> - panic("%s: dup alloc ino=%" PRId64 " on %s: mode %x/%x "
> + panic("%s: dup alloc ino=%" PRId64 " on %s: mode %o/%o "
Can I do this in a panic message btw?
pea
(Please Expand Acronyms)
Thx,
agc
On 7 May 2016 at 04:59, Maxime Villard wrote:
> Module Name:src
> Committed By: maxv
> Date: Sat May 7 11:59:09 UTC 2016
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_subr.c
>
> Log Message:
> uaf
>
>
> To generate a
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 01:38:54PM +, Maxime Villard wrote:
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_vfsops.c
Log Message:
Small changes:
- instead of always calling DPRINTF with __func__, put __func__ directly
in the macro
- ffs_mountfs(): rename fsblockloc -
Le 14/02/2015 20:21, David Holland a écrit :
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 08:07:39AM +, Maxime Villard wrote:
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_appleufs.c
Log Message:
ffs_appleufs_validate():
- remove superfluous printfs
- ensure ul_namelen!=0, otherwise the kernel
Also, I think you might want to keep the print when the
checksum is wrong.
If we keep this print, then we keep a lot of other prints. So we don't keep
it.
i don't follow.
usually these messages are the only real indication of what is
actually wrong, and they aren't log spew problems.
In article 26607.1424011...@splode.eterna.com.au,
matthew green m...@eterna.com.au wrote:
Also, I think you might want to keep the print when the
checksum is wrong.
If we keep this print, then we keep a lot of other prints. So we don't
keep it.
i don't follow.
usually these messages are
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 08:07:39AM +, Maxime Villard wrote:
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_appleufs.c
Log Message:
ffs_appleufs_validate():
- remove superfluous printfs
- ensure ul_namelen!=0, otherwise the kernel accesses ul_name[-1] and
overwrites the
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:15:54AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_wapbl.c
Log Message:
CID 975226: hande error from UFS_WAPBL_BEGIN
That won't work; AFAICT, if that UFS_WAPBL_BEGIN fails you need to do
fs-fs_flags |= FS_DOWAPBL before calling
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:17:29PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_wapbl.c
Log Message:
move the flag setting higher to avoid KASSERT (dholland)
unfortunately... I don't think that's right either. I'm not sure what
might happen if it sets the
On Apr 23, 2011, at 00:36, Juergen Hannken-Illjes wrote:
Module Name: src
Committed By: hannken
Date: Sat Apr 23 07:36:02 UTC 2011
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_balloc.c
Log Message:
Try to keep snapshot indirect blocks contiguous.
This speeds up snapshot
Module Name: src
Committed By: pooka
Date: Mon Aug 9 15:50:13 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/sys/ufs/ffs: ffs_vfsops.c
Log Message:
Return error if we try to mount a file system with block size MAXBSIZE.
Note: there is a billion ways to make the kernel panic by trying
On Mon Aug 09 2010 at 17:59:08 +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
Tested by compiling sys/rump with CPPFLAGS+=-DMAXPHYS=32768 (all
tests in tests/fs still pass). I don't know how we're going to
translate this into an easy regression test, though. Maybe with
a hacked newfs?
No. What you
12 matches
Mail list logo