Hi
Here is my latest attempt at netbsd32 swapctl. I had to make uvm_swap_stats()
available to emul code, but that seems to be what it was intented for,
according to comments in the code.
I kept the stuff #ifdef __amd64__ but I am not convinced of the benefit
is worth the ifdef. Perhaps we could
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 08:41:15AM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
Hi
Here is my latest attempt at netbsd32 swapctl. I had to make uvm_swap_stats()
available to emul code, but that seems to be what it was intented for,
according to comments in the code.
Looks good.
I kept the stuff #ifdef
Le 01/02/2014 10:51, Martin Husemann a écrit :
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 08:41:15AM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
Hi
Here is my latest attempt at netbsd32 swapctl. I had to make uvm_swap_stats()
available to emul code, but that seems to be what it was intented for,
according to comments in
We have a fairly large number of device driver modules which use the
(undocumented?) ioconf statement in config(1) to generate the various
data structures needed by the config(9) mechanisms. This seems to work
just fine for real devices, but for pseudo-devices the generated files
don't quite
On Feb 1, 2014, at 12:41 AM, Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org wrote:
+ int count = SCARG(uap, misc);
+ int i, error;
+
+ sep = kmem_alloc(sizeof(*sep) * count, KM_SLEEP);
+ sep32 = kmem_alloc(sizeof(*sep32) * count, KM_SLEEP);
Before using count, one must limit it using:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 08:41:15AM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
Hi
Here is my latest attempt at netbsd32 swapctl. I had to make uvm_swap_stats()
available to emul code, but that seems to be what it was intented for,
according to comments in the code.
I've just looked at the code in
David Laight da...@l8s.co.uk wrote:
You are leaking the contents of kernel memory to userspace.
How? I do not copy more than the string, and I only copyout filled
records.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
You only need one sep32 and then copyout each entry:
Isn't there a performance impact to call copyout several times instead
of one?
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
On Feb 1, 2014, at 4:49 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org wrote:
Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
You only need one sep32 and then copyout each entry:
Isn't there a performance impact to call copyout several times instead
of one?
Compared to kmem_alloc/kmem_free? Notice we
Latest revision of the netbsd32 swapctl patch
I noted david@ suggestion to rework uvm_swap_stats() to add a callback,
but I am not sure it is worth it. This is just the emulation path for
a rarely used code path. I can work on it if the consensus is that it
is the way to go, though.
Index:
Latest revision of the netbsd32 swapctl patch
this looks good now.
thanks for dealing with this properly!
.mrg.
11 matches
Mail list logo