OSPFD

Hi, I just started using OpenBSD's ospfd. 1. I would like to have a direct Ethernet link between OpenBSD box and Cisco/Juniper router. I would like to specify the link type as point to point. Which configuration directive I have to use ?. 2. I would like to use SHA1/SHA2 Message digest

remove splsoftnet from *_clone_destroy

Hello - I believe this is correct. After mikeb@ committed destroying cloneable interfaces under splsoftnet, these aren't needed anymore. Index: if_mpe.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if_mpe.c,v retrieving revision 1.54 diff -u -p

Re: work-in-progress iwm performance fix

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 02:35:18AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: > I'd like to know if this diff helps with iwm(4) performance issues > some people have been reporting. > > This is not done yet and some details don't really make sense, especially > the #if 0 hiding of what should be correct code

ownership fix for /usr/lib/locate/src.db

Without this diff src.db is installed as the build user when makeing a noperm release. is required for BINOWN/BINGRP. Ok? natano Index: Makefile === RCS file: /cvs/src/distrib/sets/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -p

net80211: allow ADDBA confirmation by driver

When processing an ADDBA request, iwm(4) runs a task which sends a command to the firmware and waits for confirmation. This command can fail and there's currently no way we can recover from such an error. With the diff below, drivers can return EBUSY from their ic_ampdu_rx_start() handler which

Re: share/: install ownership fixes

Ping. Ok? On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 10:16:20PM +0200, Martin Natano wrote: > Another diff I typoed, also found by rpe@. Ok? > > Index: share/misc/pcvtfonts/Makefile > === > RCS file: /cvs/src/share/misc/pcvtfonts/Makefile,v >

Re: dl_unwind_find_exidx prototype

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Mark Kettenis wrote: > So my diff that switched libunwind to use dl_unwind_find_exidx() was > incomplete. I forgot that I had put its prototype in and > missed that file when generating the diff. However, isn't > really the right

dl_unwind_find_exidx prototype

So my diff that switched libunwind to use dl_unwind_find_exidx() was incomplete. I forgot that I had put its prototype in and missed that file when generating the diff. However, isn't really the right place to put the prototype. We have dl_iterate_phdr() in , and dl_unwind_find_exidx() is

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 17:20 +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 20/09/16(Tue) 17:04, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:51 -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > > More... > > > > > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20 September 2016 at 17:09, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 20/09/16(Tue) 10:51, David Hill wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: >> > More... >> > >> > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 >> > Starting stack trace... >> > splassert_check() at

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20/09/16(Tue) 17:04, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:51 -0400, David Hill wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > More... > > > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > > > Starting stack trace... > > > splassert_check() at

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:51 -0400, David Hill wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > More... > > > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > > > Starting stack trace... > > >

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:09:41PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 20/09/16(Tue) 10:51, David Hill wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > More... > > > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > > > Starting stack trace... > > > splassert_check() at

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 05:04:02PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:51 -0400, David Hill wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > More... > > > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > > > Starting stack trace... > > >

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20/09/16(Tue) 10:51, David Hill wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > More... > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > > Starting stack trace... > > splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 > > sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 > > route_input() at

Re: libc: remove pointless off_t, size_t, void* and char* casts

On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 20:27:56 -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: > I'm pretty sure I got all of the "no effect" casts to off_t and size_t. > I picked up the void* and char* casts with a less comprehensize search, so > there may be some that slipped through. > > This diff was checked by comparing

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:51 -0400, David Hill wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > More... > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > > Starting stack trace... > > splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 > > sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 > >

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20 September 2016 at 16:50, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 20/09/16(Tue) 16:37, Alexander Bluhm wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 04:17:37PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: >> > Can we assert that *_usrreq is always called under splsoftnet? >> >> I think that is the way to go.

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > More... > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 > Starting stack trace... > splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 > sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 > route_input() at route_input+0x284 > pflog_clone_create() at

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20/09/16(Tue) 16:37, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 04:17:37PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > > Can we assert that *_usrreq is always called under splsoftnet? > > I think that is the way to go. Long time back the spl moved from > inet to socket. We need it in the socket

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 04:17:37PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > Can we assert that *_usrreq is always called under splsoftnet? I think that is the way to go. Long time back the spl moved from inet to socket. We need it in the socket layer to fix various races. > I recall fixing some of them

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20 September 2016 at 15:55, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:21:55AM -0400, David Hill wrote: >> With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. > > With splsoftnet() in soshutdown() I can fix this one. > > splassert: sowwakeup: want 5 have 0 > Starting stack

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:39:17PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:19 -0400, David Hill wrote: > > Another... > > > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 4 > > Starting stack trace... > > splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 > > sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 > >

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:21:55AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. With splsoftnet() in soshutdown() I can fix this one. splassert: sowwakeup: want 5 have 0 Starting stack trace... splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 sowwakeup() at sowwakeup+0x27 uipc_usrreq()

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

More... splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 0 Starting stack trace... splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 route_input() at route_input+0x284 pflog_clone_create() at pflog_clone_create+0xa4 if_clone_create() at if_clone_create+0x7f ifioctl() at ifioctl+0x35a

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

Another splassert: sowwakeup: want 5 have 0 Starting stack trace... splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 sowwakeup() at sowwakeup+0x27 uipc_usrreq() at uipc_usrreq+0xfd sys_shutdown() at sys_shutdown+0x67 syscall() at syscall+0x27b --- syscall (number 134) --- end of kernel end trace frame:

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:19 -0400, David Hill wrote: > Another... > > splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 4 > Starting stack trace... > splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 > sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 > pfkey_sendup() at pfkey_sendup+0x99 > pfkeyv2_sendmessage() at

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:27:57AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:16:50PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:21:55AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > > With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. > > > Here are the first ones that were detected. > > > > Thanks

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:16:50PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:21:55AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > > With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. > > Here are the first ones that were detected. > > Thanks for the fast report. > > So fifo works around the socket layer. Better

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On 20 September 2016 at 15:16, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:21:55AM -0400, David Hill wrote: >> With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. >> Here are the first ones that were detected. > > Thanks for the fast report. > > So fifo works around the socket

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

And another. splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 4 Starting stack trace... splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 pfkey_sendup() at pfkey_sendup+0x99 pfkeyv2_sendmessage() at pfkeyv2_sendmessage+0x226 pfkeyv2_expire() at pfkeyv2_expire+0x18d tdb_soft_timeout() at

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

Another... splassert: sorwakeup: want 5 have 4 Starting stack trace... splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 sorwakeup() at sorwakeup+0x27 pfkey_sendup() at pfkey_sendup+0x99 pfkeyv2_sendmessage() at pfkeyv2_sendmessage+0x226 pfkeyv2_expire() at pfkeyv2_expire+0x18d tdb_timeout() at

Re: net80211: parse DTIM count and period from TIM IE

OK On 2016 Sep 20 (Tue) at 14:14:49 +0200 (+0200), Stefan Sperling wrote: :Parse the DTIM count and period advertised in beacons and store them :in the node structure. This should be useful for iwm(4) in the future. :The TIM IE is documented in 802.11-2012 section "8.4.2.7 TIM element". : :ok? :

Re: bluhm's splsoftassert

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 08:21:55AM -0400, David Hill wrote: > With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. > Here are the first ones that were detected. Thanks for the fast report. So fifo works around the socket layer. Better call soconnect2() instead of unp_connect2(). This adds the missing

bluhm's splsoftassert

Hello - With bluhm's r1.160 uipc_socket.c. Here are the first ones that were detected. splassert: sowwakeup: want 5 have 0 Starting stack trace... splassert_check() at splassert_check+0x78 sowwakeup() at sowwakeup+0x27 unp_connect2() at unp_connect2+0x62 fifo_open() at fifo_open+0x244

net80211: parse DTIM count and period from TIM IE

Parse the DTIM count and period advertised in beacons and store them in the node structure. This should be useful for iwm(4) in the future. The TIM IE is documented in 802.11-2012 section "8.4.2.7 TIM element". ok? There used to be code in iwm(4) which read these values from the ic

Re: teach BFD how to send route messages, again

On 2016 Sep 17 (Sat) at 12:05:54 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: :This is a 2nd pass at having BFD send route messages. : :I fixed the things pointed out in the first thread, with the following :comments: : : route(8) for the ramdisks is not built with SMALL, so adding SMALL :won't help. : :

Re: teach BFD how to send route messages, again

On 2016 Sep 18 (Sun) at 20:29:57 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: :On 2016 Sep 17 (Sat) at 13:15:56 +0200 (+0200), Peter Hessler wrote: ::Tested on an amd64 bsd.rd. dhclient, route add, route del, route show, ::all still work, and it's slightly smaller. :: : :All options, commands, modifiers,

Re: libc: remove pointless off_t, size_t, void* and char* casts

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 08:27:56PM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: > --- stdlib/malloc.c 18 Sep 2016 13:46:28 - 1.196 > +++ stdlib/malloc.c 19 Sep 2016 11:55:20 - > @@ -1231,6 +1231,7 @@ _malloc_init(int from_rthreads) > mprotect(_readonly, sizeof(malloc_readonly),

Re: timeout_set_proc(9)

On 15/09/16(Thu) 16:29, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > After discussing with a few people about a new "timed task" API I came > to the conclusion that mixing timeouts and tasks will result in: > > - always including a 'struct timeout' in a 'struct task', or the other > the way around > or > >

Re: db_{interface,trace}.c: ansify function definitions

Am 19.09.2016 um 22:30 schrieb Philip Guenther: On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Jasper Lievisse Adriaanse wrote: OK? Index: alpha/alpha/db_trace.c ... ok guenther@ There is one too many closing brace in the arm code: Index: sys/arch/arm/arm/db_trace.c

Re: libc: remove pointless off_t, size_t, void* and char* casts

Reads fine to me. OK.