On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 08:31:23PM -0300, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> I found another race related to some missing locking, this time around
> uvm_pageclean().
>
> Diff below fixes the two places in /sys/uvm where the page queue lock
> should be taken. To prevent further corruption I added some asse
Ted, do you recall why silent clipping was preferable to reporting a
range error? I prefer an error for the out of range values of hw.setperf
and so does most of the kernel sysctls.
Before:
% doas sysctl -w hw.setperf=-1; echo $?; sysctl hw.setperf
hw.setperf: 0 -> -1
0
hw.setperf=0
After:
% doas
On 19/11/20(Thu) 01:02, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18 2020, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > While auditing the various uses of the uvmexp fields I came across
> > those under #ifdet notyet. May I delete them so I don't have to give
> > them some MP love? Ok?
>
> ok jca@, but while
Hello Tom,
Thanks for sharing your work, that's awesome!
On 14/11/20(Sat) 13:13, Tom Rollet wrote:
> Here is a diff for dynamic tracing of kernel's functions boundaries.
> It's implemented as one of the dt's provider on i386 and amd64.
> To activate it, DDBPROF and pseudo device dt must be activa
On 11/16/20 12:15 AM, Paul de Weerd wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 08:53:36AM +0100, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri wrote:
| On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 08:51:22PM +0100, Paul de Weerd wrote:
| > Hi all,
| >
| > I misread find(1) and did:
| >
| > [weerdpom] $ find path/to/cam -name \*.JPG
On November 17, 2020 1:11:42 PM GMT+01:00, Paul de Weerd
wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 01:06:05AM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote:
>| On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 09:04:53AM +0100, Paul de Weerd wrote:
>| > Hi Alexander,
>| >
>| > On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 10:22:32PM +0100, Alexander Hall wrote:
>| >
On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 05:53:53PM +0100, Florian Obser wrote:
> The recent fix for handling large (about 16k) answers in unwind has
> the downside that we are now always copying at least 16k per answer
> between the resolver and frontend process.
> That seems wasteful.
>
> This re-arranges things
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 12:31:27PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> The io marshall code in rpki-client is a bit strange. It mixes
> non-blocking and blocking sematics and some of the code could be more
> async. This is the first mini step. Always use the buffer io API and
> remove the functions that
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 09:25:10AM -0300, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> Here's another refactoring that moves the remaining logic of uvm_fault()
> handling lower faults, case 2, to its own function. This logic shouldn't
> be modified in the first step of unlocking amap & anon and will still be
> execut
The io marshall code in rpki-client is a bit strange. It mixes
non-blocking and blocking sematics and some of the code could be more
async. This is the first mini step. Always use the buffer io API and
remove the functions that call io_simple_write() internally.
Next step would be to build a prope
10 matches
Mail list logo