On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 04:27:40AM +, Alexis wrote:
> Indeed I understood both octboot and vmm seabios/uefi initialazation process.
>
> But has its done with kexec and linuxboot coreboot payload octboot could be
> ported to act in the same way. Explaining now again for the 3rd time, to
>
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 04:27:40AM +, Alexis wrote:
> Indeed I understood both octboot and vmm seabios/uefi initialazation process.
>
> But has its done with kexec and linuxboot coreboot payload octboot could be
> ported to act in the same way. Explaining now again for the 3rd time, to
>
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 6:04 PM Alexis wrote:
>
> english is not my native language my point is octboot good be used to
> make openbsd the bootloader on vmm therefore no need to maintaine other
> upstream stacks, therefore avoiding duplication and reducing atack surface
> like it was done on that
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:58:41AM +, Alexis wrote:
> Have vmm/vmd core developers ever thought of using octboot has a way to u
> se openbsd has a bootloader to avoid stack duplication, and attached atack
> surface reduction. Avoiding to maintain 2 stacks, seabios/uefi and host
> vm, could be
Alexis wrote:
> That is the beauty of it.
> With octboot(4) only 1 would be necessary
Don't be stupid.
Alexis wrote:
> Have vmm/vmd core developers ever thought of using octboot has a way to u
> se openbsd has a bootloader to avoid stack duplication, and attached atack
> surface reduction. Avoiding to maintain 2 stacks, seabios/uefi and host
> vm, could be a simple way to improve vmm for HVM or
Yes, it should be silent. Old debugging code obviously.
Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> Just like breakpoints, SIGILL shouldn't print anything. FWIW this seems
> to only happen once in a ports bulk build.
>
> ok?
>
>
> Index: trap.c
>
Just like breakpoints, SIGILL shouldn't print anything. FWIW this seems
to only happen once in a ports bulk build.
ok?
Index: trap.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/src/sys/arch/riscv64/riscv64/trap.c,v
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u
I think it makes sense to accept LOGIN_SETRTABLE for setclasscontext(3)
as well. Currently, it will be cleared out of the flags.
- todd
Index: lib/libc/gen/login_cap.3
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/gen/login_cap.3,v
retrieving
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 11:48:48PM +0100, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote:
> OK?
I did a regress run with witness. OK bluhm@
> 8<---8<---8<--8<
> diff --git a/sys/net/pf_ioctl.c b/sys/net/pf_ioctl.c
> index dbbc79c0a0e..329284ce6a6 100644
> ---
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 06:35:47PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 04:42:45PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > No but you push this layer into a specifc direction and by that make it
> > harder to fix the PCB tables in a different way. I just see people
> > changing the
Rate limit router advertisements according to RFC 4861 6.2.6.
In all cases, Router Advertisements sent in response to a Router
Solicitation MUST be delayed by a random time between 0 and
MAX_RA_DELAY_TIME seconds. (If a single advertisement is sent in
response to multiple
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 04:42:45PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> No but you push this layer into a specifc direction and by that make it
> harder to fix the PCB tables in a different way. I just see people
> changing the NET_ASSERT_WLOCKED() without realizing the actual reason for
> the exclusive
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:56:43PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:25:08PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > syzkaller and witness found the same bug I introduced in UDP also
> > > for
anyone?
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 12:09:03PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> syzkaller has found this race in arp.
>
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=e3dc94533ddee95b6d69c2e7049360022f4190d3
>
> The assumption of the code is that either the arp entry or the
> interface is removed.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:25:08PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > syzkaller and witness found the same bug I introduced in UDP also
> > for Raw IP. Fix it the same was for rip and rip6.
> >
> >
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:09:51PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> syzkaller and witness found the same bug I introduced in UDP also
> for Raw IP. Fix it the same was for rip and rip6.
>
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=9bac6356a881dc644265
>
Hi,
syzkaller and witness found the same bug I introduced in UDP also
for Raw IP. Fix it the same was for rip and rip6.
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=9bac6356a881dc644265
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=5b2679ee9be0895d26f9
ok?
bluhm
Index: netinet/raw_ip.c
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 09:12:23AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:24:25PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
> > i couldnt find any good examples of what to do when you wanted to
> > receive multiple control messages from a single recvmsg call. the most
> > interesting bit is how
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 11:40:12AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 10:55:48AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > As mentioned I need a TAILQ for the list of prefixes that belong to a rib
> > entry. Mainly because I need TAILQ_PREV. This diff does this replacement.
> > I did not
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 10:55:48AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> As mentioned I need a TAILQ for the list of prefixes that belong to a rib
> entry. Mainly because I need TAILQ_PREV. This diff does this replacement.
> I did not change the nexhtop LIST of prefixes to a TAILQ. Maybe something
> to
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 14:25:38 +1100
> From: Jonathan Gray
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 07:51:25PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
> > The riscv64 was likely copied from an architecture
> > providing optimized byte-swapping code (I'd bet arm64), but doesn't have
> > any such optimization, and
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 13:35:00 +1100
> From: Jonathan Gray
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 08:00:56PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
> > The current state of the kernel starts userland processes with register
> > a0 pointing to the stack, with a comment mentioning this is copied from
> > FreeBSD.
> >
As mentioned I need a TAILQ for the list of prefixes that belong to a rib
entry. Mainly because I need TAILQ_PREV. This diff does this replacement.
I did not change the nexhtop LIST of prefixes to a TAILQ. Maybe something
to consider but there is no real need for that.
This is mostly a mechanical
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 02:24:25PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
> i couldnt find any good examples of what to do when you wanted to
> receive multiple control messages from a single recvmsg call. the most
> interesting bit is how much space the buffer needs to be.
>
> if i struggled maybe someone
25 matches
Mail list logo
