[patch] Remove leading space in lib/libcrypto/asn1/a_time_tm.c

2018-05-07 Thread Nan Xiao
Hi tech@ Remove leading space in ASN1_TIME_adj_internal function, apologize if I am wrong, thanks! Index: a_time_tm.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libcrypto/asn1/a_time_tm.c,v retrieving revision 1.15 diff -u -p -r1.15 a_time_tm.c ---

Re: vfs_stall foreach mount point

2018-05-07 Thread Todd C. Miller
On Mon, 07 May 2018 19:21:37 +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > When looping over mount points, the FOREACH SAVE macro is not save. > The loop variable mp is protected by vfs_busy() so that it cannot > be unmounted. But the next mount point nmp could be unmounted while > VFS_SYNC() sleeps. As the

Re: [patch] add missing pledge to aucat(1).

2018-05-07 Thread Jesper Wallin
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 03:30:19PM +0200, Jesper Wallin wrote: > I've still not been able to test this using MIDI devices, but everything > else seems to work as far as I can tell. As Theo (tb@) kindly pointed out to me off-list, aucat(1) supports the use of multiple -i and/or -o flags, which my

Re: Towards mpsafe 'struct file'

2018-05-07 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 07:00:31PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > + short f_type; /* [I] descriptor type */ > + struct fileops *f_ops; /* [I] file operation pointers */ The function diskmapioctl() is violating this assumption. fp->f_type = DTYPE_VNODE;

vfs_stall foreach mount point

2018-05-07 Thread Alexander Bluhm
Hi, When looping over mount points, the FOREACH SAVE macro is not save. The loop variable mp is protected by vfs_busy() so that it cannot be unmounted. But the next mount point nmp could be unmounted while VFS_SYNC() sleeps. As the loop in vfs_stall() does not destroy the mount point,

Re: Introduce vfs_stall_barrier()

2018-05-07 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 06:11:32PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > I'm going to protect `f_count' with a global lock soon. That implies > that multiple FREF(9)s will be inlined. So here's a diff moving the > vfs_stall hack to a proper function. This will help when looking for > history and it

Re: Move FILE_IS_USABLE() test in fd_iterfile()

2018-05-07 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 05:47:58PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > Instead of returning a `fp' that we won't look at, skip it in the > iterator function. Non mature `fp' shouldn't be on the global list > anyway, but that's for a later diff. > > ok? OK bluhm@ > Index: kern/kern_descrip.c >

Towards mpsafe 'struct file'

2018-05-07 Thread Martin Pieuchot
Diff below is the first of 3 steps to unlock most of the network syscalls. It deals with the simpler problem of protecting statistic fields of the descriptor. For that I'm using a simple IPL_NONE mutex. Diff below also documents how the various fields are protected. In the next steps I'll deal

Introduce vfs_stall_barrier()

2018-05-07 Thread Martin Pieuchot
I'm going to protect `f_count' with a global lock soon. That implies that multiple FREF(9)s will be inlined. So here's a diff moving the vfs_stall hack to a proper function. This will help when looking for history and it reduces my upcoming locking diff. Better name? Ok? Index:

Move FILE_IS_USABLE() test in fd_iterfile()

2018-05-07 Thread Martin Pieuchot
Instead of returning a `fp' that we won't look at, skip it in the iterator function. Non mature `fp' shouldn't be on the global list anyway, but that's for a later diff. ok? Index: kern/kern_descrip.c === RCS file:

Re: [patch] add missing pledge to aucat(1).

2018-05-07 Thread Jesper Wallin
On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 11:25:19AM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 05:31:22PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote: > > > > While the last submitted patch looks correct to me, I wonder (rather > > naively) if it would be possible to refactor in such a way that > > slot_new() is

Re: new semapahore implementation using atomics and futexes

2018-05-07 Thread Paul Irofti
> > > > The reason we need this is to make semaphores safe for asynchronous > > > > signals. > > Could you describe with words what is currently broken and how the > version below fixes it? POSIX dictates that sem_post() needs to be async-safe here[0] and is thus included in the list of safe

Re: new semapahore implementation using atomics and futexes

2018-05-07 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 30/04/18(Mon) 14:36, Paul Irofti wrote: > On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 07:40:38PM +0300, Paul Irofti wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 03:34:45PM +0300, Paul Irofti wrote: > > > Here is a new semaphore implementation that uses atomic operations, > > > where available, and futexes for locking. I'm