Linux seems to permit GPE re-assignment (at least from what I can tell,
the code is a bit convoluted). In the Surface Book AML, Microsoft provides
an _L50 method as well as a _GPE method on the EC object that also returns 0x50.
This makes no sense, since EC GPEs must be edge-triggered (and an _Lxx
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 01:29:36PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 20/06/18(Wed) 13:13, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Diff below unlocks the following syscalls:
> >
> > recvmsg(2), recvfrom(2), accept(2), getpeername(2), getsockname(2),
> > accept4(2), connect(2), bind(2), setsockopt(2),
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 04:48:14PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below adds arm64 support to acpidump(8). It renames
> bios_acpi_addr() into efi_acpi_addr() and duplicates the function
> because on arm64 I just need to read a 64-bit integer I'm considering
> changing amd64 to use a
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 04:32:21PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The lates generation of 64-bit ARM server hardware seems to be
> ACPI-only. This obviously fills me with a tremendous amount of joy.
> ACPi is clearly superior to device trees. So much more superior that
> they you have to embed
When I added support for sdhc@acpi I made an ugly hack and directly
referenced the bus dma tag in a MD-specific fashion. That is not
going to work for arm64. And for arm64 I'll be needing the tag a lot
more. So set it in amd64/i386-specific code and pass it down.
ok?
Index: dev/acpi/acpi.c
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 11:08:45AM -0300, Gleydson Soares wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 08:49:31AM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 02:25:40AM -0300, Gleydson Soares wrote:
> > > unbreak ldapd regress,
> > > everything seems to be working fine.
> >
> > the point of the
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 12:27:23PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25 2018, Gleydson Soares wrote:
> > avoid passing NULL to asprintf(3) when there's no parent dn entry,
> > this happens when adding a new naming context and then putting the first
> > rdn in.
> >
> > Jun 24
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 08:49:31AM +0200, Landry Breuil wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 02:25:40AM -0300, Gleydson Soares wrote:
> > unbreak ldapd regress,
> > everything seems to be working fine.
>
> the point of the overly complicated grep line was to handle the case
> where you have a running
On 20/06/18(Wed) 13:13, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Diff below unlocks the following syscalls:
>
> recvmsg(2), recvfrom(2), accept(2), getpeername(2), getsockname(2),
> accept4(2), connect(2), bind(2), setsockopt(2), listen(2),
> getsockopt(2), shutdown(2)
>
> It doesn't mean that they won't
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 05:58:09PM -0400, Rob Pierce wrote:
> It looks like a BER problem found while testing the new ldap client (with an
> empty password) was already addressed in snmpd back in 2010 by martinh.
>
> In LDAP under a CONTEXT class, 0 corresponds to LDAP_AUTH_SIMPLE. This is
>
On Mon, Jun 25 2018, Gleydson Soares wrote:
> avoid passing NULL to asprintf(3) when there's no parent dn entry,
> this happens when adding a new naming context and then putting the first
> rdn in.
>
> Jun 24 23:51:23 x250 ldapd: vfprintf %s NULL in "@%.*s,%.*s"
> Jun 25 00:13:14 x250 ldapd:
On 23/06/18(Sat) 22:52, Denis Fondras wrote:
> Here is a diff to allow deletion of lo(4) created by rdomain.
This is very sensible area. I'd suggest writing some regression tests.
> Of course, lo(4) cannot be deleted while the rdomain is used on another
> interface. rtable is still available
On 24/06/18(Sun) 14:15, Landry Breuil wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the logitech c310 is supported by uvideo, but its uaudio fails to
> attach properly and fallbacks to ugen.
>
> uaudio0 at uhub0 port 1 configuration 1 interface 2 "Logitech Webcam C310"
> rev 2.00/0.12 addr 2
> uaudio_identify_ac: AC
On Mon, Jun 25 2018, Remi Locherer wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:25:40AM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 19 2018, Remi Locherer wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:59:24PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> >> On 2018/06/18 08:53, Remi Locherer wrote:
>> >> > Index:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 02:25:40AM -0300, Gleydson Soares wrote:
> unbreak ldapd regress,
> everything seems to be working fine.
the point of the overly complicated grep line was to handle the case
where you have a running production ldapd, and you spawn another one for
regress.. that's also why
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:25:40AM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19 2018, Remi Locherer wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:59:24PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> >> On 2018/06/18 08:53, Remi Locherer wrote:
> >> > Index: ospfd.h
> >> >
16 matches
Mail list logo
