Hello,
On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 00:55:04 +0100
Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 08:35:45PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
>> Note that IPsec still has the workaround to disable multiple queues.
>
> I think we can remove the ipsec_in_use workaround now. The IPsec
> path is protected
On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 08:35:45PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Note that IPsec still has the workaround to disable multiple queues.
I think we can remove the ipsec_in_use workaround now. The IPsec
path is protected with the kernel lock.
There are some issues left:
- npppd l2pt ipsecflowinfo
For those building -current themselves, when you update past the commit
below you must be sure to build *and reboot to* a new kernel with the
change before you install a new libc or ld.so!
If you fail to do so then anything using the newer-than-kernel libc/ld.so
will coredump immediately,
On 11/22 11:15, Jeremy Evans wrote:
> On 10/19 09:34, Jeremy Evans wrote:
> > Currently, when creating an archive file with pax(1), pax will attempt
> > to open a file even if the file will be skipped due to an -s
> > replacement with the empty string. With this change, pax will not
> > attempt to
Create a common repo_done() function which does the entiyq_flush and in
the case of RRDP the fallback to rsync. This simplifies the code and will
help to add the repo info to the parser process.
One difference between this and the original version is the case when a
RRDP repository merge fails.
The system revokes open files for a tty device when the device is being
reused. The revoking has applied to the old poll/select implementations
sort of automagically because the scan code has always (re)walked the
path from file to vnode to device. With kqueue, the rewalking does not
happen in
The listen version of EVFILT_READ for sockets differs somewhat from
the code in soo_poll(). The following patch adds a poll/select branch
to make the listen filter more consistent with the old code.
OK?
Index: kern/uipc_socket.c
===
Hi,
On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:20:46 +0100
Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 06:25:20PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
>> Yes, if there is another better idea, it will be welcome.
>> For this moment, the diff is the best idea for me.
>
> Sorry, no better idea. I have no experiance
On 22.12.2021. 14:52, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IPsec is not MP safe yet. To allow forwarding in parallel without
> dirty hacks, it is better to protect IPsec input and output with
> kernel lock. We do not loose much as crypto needs the kernel lock
> anyway. From here we can refine the
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 07:50:24AM +, Raf Czlonka wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 08:32:16AM GMT, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 03:49:47PM -0500, jwinnie@tilde.institute wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello OpenBSD developers,
> > >
> > > I am interested in contributing to improve
10 matches
Mail list logo