Re: pr_usrreq and splsoftnet

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:38:06AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > I'd like to enforce that pr_usrreq functions are always called at > IPL_SOFTNET. This will allow us to keep locking simple as soon as > we trade splsoftnet() for a rwlock. > > Most of the PRU_* actions are already called under spl

Re: cwm ptrmove keybindings

Fri, 11 Nov 2016 20:47:49 +0200 li...@wrant.com > Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:42:42 -0500 Okan Demirmen > > Hi, > > > > mpi@ recently alerted me to the fact that cwm(1)'s default keybindings for > > ptrmove actions conflict with emacs users' uses, namely all the > > control-[arrow] > > bindings that cwm

Re: pr_usrreq and splsoftnet

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:38:06AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > I'd like to enforce that pr_usrreq functions are always called at > IPL_SOFTNET. This will allow us to keep locking simple as soon as > we trade splsoftnet() for a rwlock. > > Most of the PRU_* actions are already called under spl

Re: smtpd: internal cleanups, part 2

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:09:43PM +0100, Eric Faurot wrote: > This diff removes the IO_TLSVERIFIED which is not a io event, and > inlines the necessary code where the callback functions are called > for this event. > yes, it was confusing too ok > Index: ioev.c > ==

smtpd: internal cleanups, part 2

This diff removes the IO_TLSVERIFIED which is not a io event, and inlines the necessary code where the callback functions are called for this event. Eric. Index: ioev.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/smtpd/ioev.c,v retrieving revisi

Intel 10GbE (ix) driver update - Looking for tests

Hi, I've done a massive update of our ix(4) driver that brings support for X550 family of controllers including those integrated into new Xeon chips as well as QSFP support for X520 (82599) but this needs thorough testing. If you're using Intel 10Gb controllers, please make sure that you either (

pf IPv6 hop-by-hop after fragment header

Hi, I found the link http://www.secfu.net/ in one of sthen@'s mails. There the author mentions that we accept IPv6 hop-by-hop headers after fragment headers. In fact this is a result of my pf fragment reassembly, so add an extra check there. ok? bluhm Index: net/pf.c ==

Re: smtpd: internal cleanups

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 09:13:40PM +0100, Eric Faurot wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on improving the async io interface in smtpd, make it simpler > to use and less error-prone. > > The short-term goal is to make the io structure opaque. > > With this first diff, the user pointer is passed as para

Re: texinfo: /usr/share/info/dir permissions

On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 02:52:24PM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote: > This is the last installed file whose permissions are dependent on the > umask. ok? > > Index: gnu/usr.bin/texinfo/Makefile.bsd-wrapper > === > RCS file: /var/cvs/src/g

Re: smtpd: internal cleanups

On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:13:40 +0100, Eric Faurot wrote: > With this first diff, the user pointer is passed as parameter to the io > callback instead of having the user dereference the io structure. There > are places where the callback function is triggered outside of the io > layer. It's not desir

socket splicing with large mbufs

Hi, I have seen a hang in my socket splicing test on loopback with large mbufs and reduced buffer size. If the send buffer size is less than the size of a single mbuf, it will never fit. So if the send buffer is empty, split the large mbuf and move only a part. ok? bluhm Index: kern/uipc_sock

smtpd: internal cleanups

Hi, I'm working on improving the async io interface in smtpd, make it simpler to use and less error-prone. The short-term goal is to make the io structure opaque. With this first diff, the user pointer is passed as parameter to the io callback instead of having the user dereference the io struct

Re: bpf_mtap(9) w/o KERNEL_LOCK

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 12:18:48PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > Here's another extracted diff: Use goto in read & write and always > increment the reference count in write. > > ok? OK bluhm@ > > Index: net/bpf.c > === > RCS fi

Re: tcp_input.c: recursive splsoftnet()

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 09:58:00AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 15/11/16(Tue) 16:36, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > > [...] > > You are a bit inconsistent wether you remove the {} from one line > > if blocks. > > That should fix my inconsistencies. OK bluhm@ > > Index: netinet/tcp_input.c > ===

Re: bpf_mtap(9) w/o KERNEL_LOCK

On 13/09/16(Tue) 12:23, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > Here's the big scary diff I've been using for some months now to stop > grabbing the KERNEL_LOCK() in bpf_mtap(9). This has been originally > written to prevent lock ordering inside pf_test(). Now that we're > heading toward using a rwlock, we won'

pr_usrreq and splsoftnet

I'd like to enforce that pr_usrreq functions are always called at IPL_SOFTNET. This will allow us to keep locking simple as soon as we trade splsoftnet() for a rwlock. Most of the PRU_* actions are already called under splsoftnet() and the ones that are not are relatively small, so it should not

FCC Auth patch for umb(4)

Some MBIM devices need a FCC Authentication before they're willing to turn on the radio. This has to be done by sending a QMI command inside an MBIM message. This patch is based on an earlier patch by Stuart Henderson. One crucial thing was missing in sthen@'s patch: first a client-id (CID) has to

Re: tcp_input.c: recursive splsoftnet()

On 15/11/16(Tue) 16:36, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > [...] > You are a bit inconsistent wether you remove the {} from one line > if blocks. That should fix my inconsistencies. Index: netinet/tcp_input.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet

Re: [PATCH] usbdevs for Sierra Wireless EM7455

On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 08:11:01 -0800 Bryan Vyhmeister wrote: > This patch adds the Sierra Wireless EM7455 umb(4) device to usbdevs in > preparation for another patch to if_umb.c which adds full support for > the EM7455. > > Bryan > > > Index: sys/dev/usb/usbdevs > ===