Re: netlock ktrace nfs

2021-07-02 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 01/07/21(Thu) 21:27, Alexander Bluhm wrote: > Hi, > > Writing ktrace files to NFS must no be done while holding the net > lock. accept(2) panics, connect(2) dead locks. Additionally copy > in or out must not hold the net lock as it may be a mmapped file > on NFS. > > - Simplify

Re: systat(1) counter overflow

2021-07-02 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2021/07/02 13:09, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 01/07/21(Thu) 13:53, Anindya Mukherjee wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I noticed that if I leave the system running for more than about a month, > > some > > of the counters in the uvm view of systat(1) overflow and become negative. > > This > > is

rsync fix symlink discovery

2021-07-02 Thread Claudio Jeker
Hit this today while doing some tests. symlink_read() needs to use just the filename and not the full path because fts_read(3) does chdir internally. Without this I got: openrsync: error: ./obj/openrsync.1: readlink: No such file or directory openrsync: error: symlink_read openrsync: error:

Re: compare-dest support for openrsync

2021-07-02 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 05:47:16PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote: > Thge compare-dest option of rsync is something I would like to use in > rpki-client. This implements just that and I think after that adding > copy-dest and link-dest options should be somewhat easy to add as well. > Lightly tested

Re: systat(1) counter overflow

2021-07-02 Thread Martin Pieuchot
On 01/07/21(Thu) 13:53, Anindya Mukherjee wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that if I leave the system running for more than about a month, some > of the counters in the uvm view of systat(1) overflow and become negative. > This > is because the members of struct uvmexp in sys/uvm/uvmexp.h are ints.

Re: netlock ktrace nfs

2021-07-02 Thread Alexander Bluhm
On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 01:05:39PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > Looks good to me. Grabbing solock() after calling pledge_socket() in > sys_connect(), like it is already done in sys_bind(), means it is ok > to read this field w/o lock. Is it true? I guess it is good enough. If MP rules are

Re: systat(1) counter overflow

2021-07-02 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2021/07/02 13:43, Stuart Henderson wrote: > Go has its own translated copy of structs from system headers (e.g. > in golang.org/x/sys/unix/zsysctl_openbsd_*) and these are bundled in > many ports that use go (even core system libraries are not exempt from > "vendoring" or having old versions

Re: systat(1) counter overflow

2021-07-02 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 01:09:05PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 01/07/21(Thu) 13:53, Anindya Mukherjee wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I noticed that if I leave the system running for more than about a month, > > some > > of the counters in the uvm view of systat(1) overflow and become negative. >

Re: ksh: require expression in while loop

2021-07-02 Thread Todd C . Miller
Updated diff that also requires a non-empty command list for "for" loops and adjusts the NOTES file to match. - todd Index: bin/ksh/NOTES === RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ksh/NOTES,v retrieving revision 1.16 diff -u -p -u -r1.16 NOTES

ksh: require expression in while loop

2021-07-02 Thread Todd C . Miller
Currently, our ksh/sh accepts things like: while do done which cannot be interrupted via ^C by default. If, However, the expression is not empty everything is fine. E.g. while :; do done Most other shells require a non-empty expression which avoids this problem (zsh is the outlier

Re: systat(1) counter overflow

2021-07-02 Thread Theo de Raadt
Claudio Jeker wrote: > I know that golang has its definition of uvmexp and so if you change the > ABI then you would break at least that. struct uvmexp is used more often > than we would like. It is a huge ABI change. If we are going to change the size of the subunits, we have to get it right

usleep(3): always call nanosleep(2)

2021-07-02 Thread Scott Cheloha
Hi, As with sleep(3), usleep(3) is a wrapper around nanosleep(2). I'd prefer it if we always call nanosleep(), even when the input is zero. This makes the code simpler, makes reasoning about behavior simpler, and guarantees you get hit the ktrace for nanosleep if the program calls usleep().

Re: usleep(3): always call nanosleep(2)

2021-07-02 Thread Todd C . Miller
On Fri, 02 Jul 2021 10:53:23 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote: > As with sleep(3), usleep(3) is a wrapper around nanosleep(2). I'd > prefer it if we always call nanosleep(), even when the input is zero. > > This makes the code simpler, makes reasoning about behavior simpler, > and guarantees you get

Re: vmd(8): simplify vcpu logic, removing uart & net reads

2021-07-02 Thread Dave Voutila
Dave Voutila writes: > Looking for some broader testing of the following diff. It cleans up > some complicated logic predominantly left over from the early days of > vmd prior to its having a dedicated device thread. Still looking for tester feedback. I've been running this diff while hosting

Cleanup of err(1, "unveil") pattern

2021-07-02 Thread Ashton Fagg
Original thread and discussion here: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech=162000231914017=2 I started this a couple of months ago but realized I never actually finished this and submitted the full diff. So here it is, for whole src tree. I've run this through a `make build` here locally to ensure