Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Renato Aguiar
Hi Robert, It is working fine on my Ivy Bridge. No regressions. i7-3520M -- Intel HD Graphics 4000 (ThinkPad x230) kern.version=OpenBSD 6.2 (GENERIC.MP) #115: Wed Sep 27 10:45:53 MDT 2017 Regards, Robert Nagy writes: > Hi > > This is an updated diff for preliminary kabylake support for 6.2,

[patch] Change size's type from int to size_t in ldd.c

2017-09-27 Thread Nan Xiao
Hi tech@, I think the type of size variable should be more accurate to use size_t instead of int. Best Regards Nan Xiao Index: ldd.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/libexec/ld.so/ldd/ldd.c,v retrieving revision 1.21 diff -u -p -r1.21 ldd.c -

Re: New: netctl(8) - cli network-location manager

2017-09-27 Thread Aaron Poffenberger
* Aaron Poffenberger [2017-09-26 21:53:24 -0500]: > I should add, I thought about adding commands like rcctl's > `get|getdef|set` commands to do full interface configuration (`set > nwid wapname` or `set bssid `) but wanted to get feedback on > the current approach before going to far down the ra

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Richard Toohey
On 09/28/17 08:43, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote: On 09/27/17 18:41, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote: On 09/27/17 00:07, Robert Nagy wrote: Hi This is an updated diff for preliminary kabylake support for 6.2, this needs extensive testing on all inteldrm variants. This diff is also in snapshots now so

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Olivier Cherrier
Hi Robert, Snapshot works pretty well on my new laptop (Intel HD Graphics 510). Resuming is working great! No regression. Thank you! dmesg is attached. There are those error messages : error: [drm:pid0:i915_firmware_load_error_print] *ERROR* failed to load firmware i915/skl_dmc_ver1

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Peter N. M. Hansteen
On 09/27/17 18:41, Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote: > On 09/27/17 00:07, Robert Nagy wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> This is an updated diff for preliminary kabylake support for 6.2, >> this needs extensive testing on all inteldrm variants. >> >> This diff is also in snapshots now so please, test, test test! > >

just a few 1<<31 to 1U<<31

2017-09-27 Thread Artturi Alm
Hi, was looking at sdmmc, and then i did remember this rev1.3 commit: http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/arch/armv7/imx/imxccm.c#rev1.3 also fixes those from under sys/dev/fdt and sys/arch/armv7 i found, didn't look elsewhere. -Artturi diff --git a/sys/arch/armv7/imx/imxccm.c b/s

Re: malloc.c: better double free check

2017-09-27 Thread Theo de Raadt
> On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 09:02:58PM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote: > > > > In the end all double frees still will be caught by the actual free > > > code, just with a delay. The delayed free buffer double free check is > > > just a way of catching it as soon as possible to make debugging > > > easier

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Peter N. M. Hansteen
On 09/27/17 00:07, Robert Nagy wrote: > > Hi > > This is an updated diff for preliminary kabylake support for 6.2, > this needs extensive testing on all inteldrm variants. > > This diff is also in snapshots now so please, test, test test! Installed the latest snapshot (OpenBSD 6.2 (GENERIC.MP)

Re: sin() implementation

2017-09-27 Thread Theo de Raadt
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 08:40:26AM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: > > Even on modern amd64s integer arithmetics and bitwise operations are > > faster (and more precise in many cases) than floating point > > equivalents. > > Can you actually substanciate this claim? The basic x87 instructions >

Re: sin() implementation

2017-09-27 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 08:40:26AM +0200, Alexandre Ratchov wrote: > Even on modern amd64s integer arithmetics and bitwise operations are > faster (and more precise in many cases) than floating point > equivalents. Can you actually substanciate this claim? The basic x87 instructions (FLD, FST, FCO

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2017 Sep 27 (Wed) at 00:07:42 +0200 (+0200), Robert Nagy wrote: : :Hi : :This is an updated diff for preliminary kabylake support for 6.2, :this needs extensive testing on all inteldrm variants. : :This diff is also in snapshots now so please, test, test test! : :Thank you : Works fine on an i3

clang-local(1) doesn't state that it's not looking in /usr/local.

2017-09-27 Thread Janne Johansson
..whereas gcc-local(1) does, so I lifted that sentence from it. Don't know if that was intentionally left out or not, but since it managed to confuse at least one person recently: $ cvs -q diff -u Index: clang-local.1 === RCS file:

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Manuel Giraud
Matthieu Herrb writes: > No visible regression so far on my IvyBridge and SandyBridge laptops. Same here on a skylake. -- Manuel Giraud

Re: preliminary kabylake support for inteldrm

2017-09-27 Thread Matthieu Herrb
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:07:42AM +0200, Robert Nagy wrote: > > Hi > > This is an updated diff for preliminary kabylake support for 6.2, > this needs extensive testing on all inteldrm variants. > > This diff is also in snapshots now so please, test, test test! No visible regression so far on m