Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Chip Marshall
On October 28, 2001, Maxim Sobolev sent me the following: > On Sun, 28 Oct 2001 02:30:40 +0200 (CEST), Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > > Athlon XP (commercial name) == Athlon MP (core name) > > AFAIK, not quite. The core name is Palomino and there are three > processors based on it: Athlon XP, Athlon MP

Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Maxim Sobolev
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001 02:30:40 +0200 (CEST), Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > Peter Wemm wrote: > > Jerry A! wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 10:00:44PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > > > : Hi, > > > : > > > : how about the following patch (untested) regarding the newer athlon xp > > > : processor type

va_copy patch for stdarg.h

2001-10-27 Thread John De Boskey
We don't seem to have va_copy() in stdarg.h. Any reason not to commit the following? Index: sys/i386/include/stdarg.h === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/i386/include/stdarg.h,v retrieving revision 1.11 diff -r1.11 stdarg.h 57a58,59 >

Re: device.hints & PCI detection conflict

2001-10-27 Thread Андрей Чернов
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 07:14:13 +0600, Nickolay Dudorov wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bootverbose shows that second copy of devices appearse on ASUS CUSL2-C or > > TUSL2-C: > > > > atkbdc-: atkbdc0 already exists, using atkbdc1 inst

Re: device.hints & PCI detection conflict

2001-10-27 Thread Nickolay Dudorov
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Andrey A. Chernov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bootverbose shows that second copy of devices appearse on ASUS CUSL2-C or > TUSL2-C: > > atkbdc-: atkbdc0 already exists, using atkbdc1 instead > sc-: sc0 already exists, using sc1 instead > vga-: vga0 already exists

hmm... (fwd)

2001-10-27 Thread Matthew Jacob
Actually- not alpha. Happened under i386, so it seems like it might be more related to the general console changes.. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 16:43:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jonathan Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTE

Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Cyrille Lefevre
Peter Wemm wrote: > Jerry A! wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 10:00:44PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > > : Hi, > > : > > : how about the following patch (untested) regarding the newer athlon xp > > : processor type ? if needed, I could submit a PR. > > > > Shouldn't Athlons and AthlonXPs be a

kernel panic in getnewvnode

2001-10-27 Thread Steve Kargl
Kernel is from 20 Oct 2001 sources. I was running cvsup grabbing the latest sources into a clean /usr/src directory. Softupdate were enabled and vfs.vmiodirenable=1. -- Steve GNU gdb 4.18 Copyright 1998 Free Software Foundation, Inc. GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public Lic

Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Greg Childers
> > Shouldn't Athlons and AthlonXPs be able to use i686 (pentiumpro) > > instruction set optimizations? > >No. They are different cpu cores that have different optimization >strategies. Yes, all Athlons can use i686 code while the k6's can't. Further, without doing any scientific testing, I w

Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Peter Wemm
Jerry A! wrote: > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 10:00:44PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > : Hi, > : > : how about the following patch (untested) regarding the newer athlon xp > : processor type ? if needed, I could submit a PR. > > Shouldn't Athlons and AthlonXPs be able to use i686 (pentiumpro) > ins

Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Wilko Bulte
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 04:23:13PM -0400, Jerry A! wrote: > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 10:00:44PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > : Hi, > : > : how about the following patch (untested) regarding the newer athlon xp > : processor type ? if needed, I could submit a PR. > > Shouldn't Athlons and Athlon

Re: adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Jerry A!
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 10:00:44PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: : Hi, : : how about the following patch (untested) regarding the newer athlon xp : processor type ? if needed, I could submit a PR. Shouldn't Athlons and AthlonXPs be able to use i686 (pentiumpro) instruction set optimizations? Als

adding athlon xp to bsd.cpu.mk

2001-10-27 Thread Cyrille Lefevre
Hi, how about the following patch (untested) regarding the newer athlon xp processor type ? if needed, I could submit a PR. Index: bsd.cpu.mk === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/share/mk/bsd.cpu.mk,v retrieving revision 1.2.2.4 diff -u -r1

device.hints & PCI detection conflict

2001-10-27 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
Bootverbose shows that second copy of devices appearse on ASUS CUSL2-C or TUSL2-C: atkbdc-: atkbdc0 already exists, using atkbdc1 instead sc-: sc0 already exists, using sc1 instead vga-: vga0 already exists, using vga1 instead vga-: line is especially dangerous since cause fake second VGA detec

Re: -CURRENT freeze under high load

2001-10-27 Thread David Malone
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 06:16:12PM +0200, Andrea Campi wrote: > Anybody has any idea how to properly fix? Can you test the following patch? David. Index: uipc_usrreq.c === RCS file: /cvs/FreeBSD-CVS/src/sys/kern/uipc_usrre

Re: devfs question

2001-10-27 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Garrett Wollman w rites: >< said: > >> Right, but the only way to get an error message is to let /sbin/init >> die and have the kernel print the message. /sbin/init cannot >> print the message when there is no "/dev/console" can it ? > >Yes, it can, if the kernel d

Re: devfs question

2001-10-27 Thread Garrett Wollman
< said: > Right, but the only way to get an error message is to let /sbin/init > die and have the kernel print the message. /sbin/init cannot > print the message when there is no "/dev/console" can it ? Yes, it can, if the kernel does the right then when hand-crafting the `init' process to ensu

XFmail and libc.so.3

2001-10-27 Thread Riccardo Torrini
To upgrade from xfree-3 to xfree-4 I removed all my installed ports but I lost mail program (I use XFMail, sorry for this :-) It compile and install fine but crashes with this message: The application crashed due to fatal error All unfinished messages were saved _: Report the bug with all the rel

Re: -CURRENT freeze under high load

2001-10-27 Thread David Malone
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 06:30:47PM +0100, David Malone wrote: > > Anyway, both ways I can trigger the bug (find . -type f | xargs mutt, and > > actually running fetchmail -a) do generate a LOT of work, so it's actually > > possible that your diagnosis (mbuf exhaustion) is correct; trouble is, this

Re: devfs question

2001-10-27 Thread Mike Silbersack
On Sat, 27 Oct 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >An error message would be sufficient; my concern was that someone > >might run into this and spend hours trying to figure out which of X > >variables was the problem. > > Right, but the only way to get an error message is to let /sbin/init > die a

Re: devfs question

2001-10-27 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Silbersack w rites: > >On Sat, 27 Oct 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> >Oops, error on my part; /proc does need to exist. So, I guess the >> >question is this: Can devfs's error handling in the case of /dev being >> >non-existant be improved? >> >> Barely,

Re: devfs question

2001-10-27 Thread Mike Silbersack
On Sat, 27 Oct 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >Oops, error on my part; /proc does need to exist. So, I guess the > >question is this: Can devfs's error handling in the case of /dev being > >non-existant be improved? > > Barely, because without /dev, how do you plan to open the console ? > > M