Hi,
i've been slowly looking at bringing dma for some of the lesser sunxis,
and have reached the point where i'm unsure what to do next beyond
testing the functionality w/spreading SoC-specific hacks "for testing"..
now even if i will manage to shove it partly under _bus_dma_tag, it will
not be u
2 week bump.
--
Scott Cheloha
> On Aug 19, 2017, at 9:40 AM, Scott Cheloha wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Same deal here as in dd(1). We're displaying an elapsed time
> so we want a monotonic clock.
>
> Because everything printed is derived from elapsed, this one
> was relatively simple.
>
> Light test
Hello Hrvoje,
> Hi,
>
> with this diff i'm getting this panic:
>
> # pfctl -nvf /etc/pf.conf
> set limit states 100
> set skip on { lo em0 }
> block return all
> pass all flags S/SA
> anchor "test1" on ix1 all {
> pass all flags S/SA
> }
>
>
> # pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf
> uvm_fault(0xff
Unexpected behavior :
GENERIC.MP#63 6.2 AMD64
(Device one) em0 <---> em5 ( Device Two <--> bridge <--> ) em0 <--->
DHCP SERVER
two#: dhclient em0
two#: ifconfig bridge0 create
two#: ifconfig bridge0 add em5
two#: ifconfig bridge0 add em0
two#: ifconfig bridge0 up
one#: dhclient em0
FAILED (pa
On 11/08/17(Fri) 15:32, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 11/08/17(Fri) 20:31, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 01:18:48PM -0400, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > Diff below merge all solock()/sounlock() dances inside nfs_connect().
> >
> > Now we sleep for memory while holding the lock.
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 02:20:25PM +, Florian Obser wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 03:49:47PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 01:21:31PM +, Florian Obser wrote:
> > > *prod*
> >
> > As author of in6_get_rand_ifid(), I approve.
> > Your diff shall be blessed.
> >
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 03:49:47PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 01:21:31PM +, Florian Obser wrote:
> > *prod*
>
> As author of in6_get_rand_ifid(), I approve.
> Your diff shall be blessed.
>
> Even more blessed if get_last_resort_ifid() were granted the in6_ prefix.
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:58:46AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 22/08/17(Tue) 10:50, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > By reviewing my last isakmpd(8) diff to fix a use-after-free, hshoexer@
> > pointed out that if exchange_establish() fails, `arg' is leaked. This is
> > not a new issue. However i
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 01:21:31PM +, Florian Obser wrote:
> *prod*
As author of in6_get_rand_ifid(), I approve.
Your diff shall be blessed.
Even more blessed if get_last_resort_ifid() were granted the in6_ prefix.
But there are more of its brothers squatting the get_ namespace, so
perhaps th
*prod*
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 09:31:26AM +, Florian Obser wrote:
>
> Rename in6_get_rand_ifi() to get_last_resort_ifid() and delete the old
> get_last_resort_ifid() function because eww.
> Also if your system is so constraint that you end up in
> get_last_resort_ifid() you don't deserve a ra
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:58:04AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Diff below also includes another fix. Don't leave a dangling pointer
> in ip_pcbopts() by calling m_dup_pkt() as suggested by visa@. Note
> that if the allocation fails I'm returning ENOBUFS like in the IPv6
> case.
>
> ok?
OK b
On 22/08/17(Tue) 10:50, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> By reviewing my last isakmpd(8) diff to fix a use-after-free, hshoexer@
> pointed out that if exchange_establish() fails, `arg' is leaked. This is
> not a new issue. However it generally happens under memory pressure,
> and when you're under memory
On 22/08/17(Tue) 14:12, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:13:31AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > @@ -1310,7 +1308,6 @@ ip_pcbopts(struct mbuf **pcbopt, struct
> > return (0);
> >
> > bad:
> > - (void)m_free(m);
> > return (EINVAL);
> > }
>
> You could replace al
13 matches
Mail list logo
