openbsd-tech mailing list

From	Subject	Date
Top Shop	Lepota i kako je zadržati - tajne Holivuda Top Shop Top E-revija: 57, 10. novembar 2010. PraktiDna re [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 10:01 am 2010
Marco Pfatschbacher	Re: Does pfsync support failover of pf 'route-to' state? ... No, it doesn't. I have a non-perfect diff for 4.4 if you're interested.. [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 9:24 am 2010
chefren	Does pfsync support failover of pf 'route-to' state? (o ... (Hm, saw no response after posting to misc@, manual cross-posting to tech@...) Short question: does pfsync currently support fluent failover of a pf established 'route-to' state, when a CARP failover happens? Reason for the question: CARP, pfsync, and route-to all seem to work nicely in our OpenBSD load balancer (LB) setup, except: fluent failover of established TCP connections doesn't work for us. When an external client establishes a TCP connection, via our primary LB, to one of our ... [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 9:13 am 2010
EDM KSA	ÚÑæÖÇÊ ÎÇÕÉ Úáì ÃÌåÒÉ ÊÓÌíá ÇáÍÖæÑ æ ÇáÊÍßã ÈÇáÈÕãÉ You are seeing this message in Text format. if your email is in the junk folder, add the sender email to your address book and move this email into your inbox to view the HTML version. [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 5:15 am 2010
Kenneth R Westerback	Re: who(1) diff to show more of hostname Reads good to me. ok krw@ .... Ken [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 8:35 am 2010
Otto Moerbeek	who(1) diff to show more of hostname Hi, Make who(1) a tiny bit smarter and show more of the host part. Max linewidth is 80. -Otto Index: who.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/who/who.c,v retrieving revision 1.18 diff -u -p -r1.18 who.c --- who.c 27 Oct 2009 23:59:50 -0000 1.18 +++ who.c 10 Nov 2010 07:35:48 -0000 @@ -59,7 +59,9 @@ int show_labels; /* show column labels int show_quick; /* quick, names only */ #define NAME_WIDTH 8 -#define ... [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 12:40 am 2010
Mike Belopuhov	Re: Prevent recursion in acpibat(4) On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> ok mikeb [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 7:56 am 2010
Philip Guenther	Re: SCHED_ASSERT_UNLOCKED is considered harmful in the _ ... On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> Hmmm. Since we don't swap out the uspace, is there any reason to not just make the pcb and pstats part of struct proc? That gets you your pool allocation without the overhead of Yet Another Pool. Philip [ message continues ]	Nov 9, 7:22 pm 2010
Mike Belopuhov	Re: ix(4) diff to improve performance on high load i'm okay with the diff (: [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 7:11 am 2010
Mark Kettenis	Re: amd64 segment cleanup: part 3 In any case, please avoid commiting C++ style comments. [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 3:24 am 2010
Philip Guenther	Re: amd64 segment cleanup: part 3 No, the double-fault stack is tss_ist[0]. That's set in x86_64_proc0_tss_ldt_init() and x86_64_init_pcb_tss_ldt (primary vs secondary processor) to point into the processor's idle process uspace. It's the same place it points now, it's just that the patch changes it to only get set once, when each processor's idle process is created, instead of having it be a per-process value by virtue of the Ah, that was debugging code, capturing rax before the diagnostic check which overwrites it. ... [ message continues ]	Nov 9, 7:19 pm 2010
Mike Belopuhov	Re: amd64 segment cleanup: part 3 oh, "gd_ist == 0" is a special case: "To enable the IST mechanism for a specific interrupt, system software stores a non-zero value in the interrupt gate-descriptor IST-index field. If the IST index is zero, the modified legacy stack-switching mechanism (described in the previous section) is used." maybe you can put a bit more elaborate comment if you plan on keeping it? anyways i'm ok with the diff. [ message continues ]	Nov 10, 3:08 am 2010