Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/arm

2015-04-07 Thread Ryota Ozaki
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Nick Hudson sk...@netbsd.org wrote:
 On 04/07/15 04:19, Ryota Ozaki wrote:

 Module Name:src
 Committed By:   ozaki-r
 Date:   Tue Apr  7 03:19:25 UTC 2015

 Modified Files:
 src/sys/arch/arm/ep93xx: ep93xx_intr.c
 src/sys/arch/arm/ixp12x0: ixp12x0_intr.c

 Log Message:
 Add missing #include arm/cpu.h

 sys/lwp.h is preferred, I think

I see. It works for me too. I'll change so.

Just curious, why is sys/lwp.h better?
Because it is MI while arm/cpu.h is MD?

Thanks,
  ozaki-r


Re: CVS commit: src/sys/dev/pci

2015-04-07 Thread Masanobu SAITOH

Hi, Martin.

On 2015/04/06 16:38, Martin Husemann wrote:

Module Name:src
Committed By:   martin
Date:   Mon Apr  6 07:38:17 UTC 2015

Modified Files:
src/sys/dev/pci: if_bge.c

Log Message:
Make sure to halt (not just stop) the bge_tick callout during detach.


To generate a diff of this commit:
cvs rdiff -u -r1.280 -r1.281 src/sys/dev/pci/if_bge.c

Please note that diffs are not public domain; they are subject to the
copyright notices on the relevant files.


What does this change fix? To prevent panic on shutdown?

Almost all drviers have the same code. Should we fix all of them
like this?

--
---
SAITOH Masanobu (msai...@execsw.org
 msai...@netbsd.org)


Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/arm

2015-04-07 Thread Matt Thomas

 On Apr 7, 2015, at 1:27 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@netbsd.org wrote:
 
 On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Nick Hudson sk...@netbsd.org wrote:
 On 04/07/15 04:19, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
 
 Module Name:src
 Committed By:   ozaki-r
 Date:   Tue Apr  7 03:19:25 UTC 2015
 
 Modified Files:
   src/sys/arch/arm/ep93xx: ep93xx_intr.c
   src/sys/arch/arm/ixp12x0: ixp12x0_intr.c
 
 Log Message:
 Add missing #include arm/cpu.h
 
 sys/lwp.h is preferred, I think
 
 I see. It works for me too. I'll change so.
 
 Just curious, why is sys/lwp.h better?
 Because it is MI while arm/cpu.h is MD?

arm/cpu.h has a dependency on sys/lwp.h


Re: CVS commit: src

2015-04-07 Thread Masao Uebayashi
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Martin Husemann mar...@duskware.de wrote:
 On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 09:40:22AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
 Hmm, it is building things twice... I am trying to figure out why but I can't
 reproduce it.

Not surprising at all if multiple output hack (*.y) is involved.

 Not sure, but it basically fails for me on all build machines if using low
 values for -j. I can get past it by doing a cleandir and dependall without
 -j.

 Also below is a log of a non-cleandir'd build failing, but that looks mostly
 the same now.

If I were you, I'd look at make -dm output.

(Remember that make(1) has no idea that foo.c and ./foo.c are
identical; they are just strings for make(1).)