On 2019/12/21 12:30, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> On arm64 systems, IPMI can actually attach using mmio. The diff below
> implements this. It also sets the IPMI revision based on the _SRV
> method if present.
>
> I can't actually test this properly. The firmware I'm using on my
> od1000 has the IPMI
> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 13:42:43 +0100
> From: Alexander Bluhm
>
> On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 04:10:03PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> > When I debug kernel with kernel core, backtrace command ends around
> > alltraps_kern_meltdown(). The following diff fixes this problem.
>
> I remember
On 2019/12/20 22:20, Ricardo Mestre wrote:
> Hello fellow citizens!
>
> Did we have any brave souls with the hardware below that tested this and
> can give me an OK?
gpioctl works fine.
If anyone still has a radio(4) device, they're not sending in their
dmesg - nothing in dmesglog for 10 years.
Hi,
New driver for AMD GPIO controller.
Datasheet is BKDG for AMD family 16h models 30h-3Fh processors.
Testing and feedback appreciated.
Index: share/man/man4/Makefile
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man4/Makefile,v
retrieving
Currently my mini-PC with AMD Ryzen CPU shows:
spdmem0 at iic0 addr 0x50: 0MB DDR4 SDRAM PC4-21300 SO-DIMM
problem here is in the calculation of the DIMM size:
dimm_size = datawidth - (chipwidth + 2);
dimm_size = ddr4_chipsize[chipsize] * (1 << dimm_size) *
On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 12:11:23PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Currently my mini-PC with AMD Ryzen CPU shows:
>
> spdmem0 at iic0 addr 0x50: 0MB DDR4 SDRAM PC4-21300 SO-DIMM
>
> problem here is in the calculation of the DIMM size:
>
> dimm_size = datawidth - (chipwidth + 2);
>
Hi,
While looking at usbdevs(8) in order to see if it is possible to extended it a
bit to match specific devices (by driver, vendor, product, ...), I found it
isn't really simple to read at first glance.
This diff do mostly code cleanup and rearranging, but it include two real
changes from
On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 10:35:28AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > From: James Hastings
> > Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 03:52:43 -0500 (EST)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > New driver for AMD GPIO controller.
> >
> > Datasheet is BKDG for AMD family 16h models 30h-3Fh processors.
> >
> > Testing and feedback
On arm64 systems, IPMI can actually attach using mmio. The diff below
implements this. It also sets the IPMI revision based on the _SRV
method if present.
I can't actually test this properly. The firmware I'm using on my
od1000 has the IPMI device in its ACPI tables. But I'm 99% certain
there
> From: James Hastings
> Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 03:52:43 -0500 (EST)
>
> Hi,
>
> New driver for AMD GPIO controller.
>
> Datasheet is BKDG for AMD family 16h models 30h-3Fh processors.
>
> Testing and feedback appreciated.
Looks good to me. Maybe somebody with an x395 or x495 can give this
On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 04:10:03PM +0900, YASUOKA Masahiko wrote:
> When I debug kernel with kernel core, backtrace command ends around
> alltraps_kern_meltdown(). The following diff fixes this problem.
I remember having that problem, too.
> ok?
OK bluhm@
> Teach gdb that the trap frame
Alexander Nasonov wrote:
> Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > Looking at our code in lib/libc/stdlib/drand48.c, i conclude that
> > drand48(3) does return 0.0 with a probability of 2^-48.
>
> I looked at the code too and I have some comments.
>
> > More generally, the function returns a uniform
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 07:40:45PM -0800, Mike Larkin wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 06:57:32PM +0900, Iori YONEJI wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 11:17 AM Mike Larkin wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 03:52:52AM +0900, Iori YONEJI wrote:
> > > > Hello tech@,
> > > >
> > > > I have
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Alexander Nasonov wrote on Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 08:33:40PM +:
> > j...@bitminer.ca wrote:
>
> >> Clarify that drand48 returns values not including 1.0.
>
> > It's not clear from the documentation whether drand48 can generate
> > a denormal number. If it can't, you
Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Alexander Nasonov wrote:
>
> > Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > > Looking at our code in lib/libc/stdlib/drand48.c, i conclude that
> > > drand48(3) does return 0.0 with a probability of 2^-48.
> >
> > I looked at the code too and I have some comments.
> >
> > > More generally,
Hi,
Alexander Nasonov wrote on Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 08:33:40PM +:
> j...@bitminer.ca wrote:
>> Clarify that drand48 returns values not including 1.0.
> It's not clear from the documentation whether drand48 can generate
> a denormal number. If it can't, you can exclude 0.0 because it's
> a
Hi Theo,
Theo de Raadt wrote on Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 04:29:24PM -0700:
> Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> Alexander Nasonov wrote on Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 08:33:40PM +:
>>> j...@bitminer.ca wrote:
Clarify that drand48 returns values not including 1.0.
>>> It's not clear from the documentation
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Looking at our code in lib/libc/stdlib/drand48.c, i conclude that
> drand48(3) does return 0.0 with a probability of 2^-48.
I looked at the code too and I have some comments.
> More generally, the function returns a uniform distribution of
> numbers from the set {2^-48 * n
18 matches
Mail list logo
