Re: drm acpi diff

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:21:33PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > The diff below provides a minimal implementation of some of the Linux > ACPI iterfaces. Enough to allow us to compile the ACPI code for > radeon(4) and amdgpu(4). With this diff the brightness keys on my HP > laptop with: >=20 > cpu

[PATCH v2] Provide static_ASN1_*(). From OpenSSL 1.1.0 API

v1->v2: Use correct static_ASN1_ITEM_start macros instead of ASN1_ITEM_start in static_ASN1_SEQUENCE_END_ref definition. --- src/lib/libcrypto/asn1/asn1t.h | 62 ++ 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+) diff --git a/src/lib/libcrypto/asn1/asn1t.h b/src/lib/libcrypto/asn

Re: [PATCH] Provide static_ASN1_*(). From OpenSSL 1.1.0 API.

On 23/07/2019 17:29, Kinichiro Inoguchi wrote: > Hi, > > +#define static_ASN1_SEQUENCE_END_ref(stname, tname) \ > + ;\ > + ASN1_ITEM_start(tname) \ > > I think this should be "static_ASN1_ITEM_start" instead "ASN1_ITEM_start". > Thank you, you are right, of course. I shall resend the pa

Re: drm acpi diff

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:21:33PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > The diff below provides a minimal implementation of some of the Linux > ACPI iterfaces. Enough to allow us to compile the ACPI code for > radeon(4) and amdgpu(4). With this diff the brightness keys on my HP > laptop with: > > cpu0:

net80211: keep nodes cached across scans

When a scan begins we currently toss away everything we have learned about access points in the previous scan iteration. This behaviour gets in the way of some things. For instance, I am working on another diff to show reasons for association failures in ifconfig output ("wrong channel", "wrong WP

Re: /bin/cp: Incorrect checking the return value

From: Otto Moerbeek Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 13:56:37 +0200 > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 05:44:35PM +0900, Masato Asou wrote: > >> Incorrect checking the return value of malloc and system calls in >> /bin/cp. >> >> ok? > > Altough I indeed prefer to check against NULL these are not incorrect, > jus

drm acpi diff

The diff below provides a minimal implementation of some of the Linux ACPI iterfaces. Enough to allow us to compile the ACPI code for radeon(4) and amdgpu(4). With this diff the brightness keys on my HP laptop with: cpu0: AMD A4-4355M APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics, 1897.56 MHz, 15-10-01 ... ra

Re: /bin/cp: Incorrect checking the return value

Masato Asou wrote: > Incorrect checking the return value of malloc and system calls in > /bin/cp. The NULL vs ! checks, I cannot agree with those. Their effect is identical and it is commonplace to use either idiom. As to precise-checks for system call return values of -1 or 0, vs <, for that

Re: /bin/cp: Incorrect checking the return value

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 05:44:35PM +0900, Masato Asou wrote: > Incorrect checking the return value of malloc and system calls in > /bin/cp. > > ok? Altough I indeed prefer to check against NULL these are not incorrect, just bad idiom. -Otto > > Index: utils.c > ===

Re: iwm(4): fix ccmp decrypt edge cases

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:11:55PM +1200, richard.n.proc...@gmail.com wrote: > See below for updated diff. Nice idea to add a panic on encrypt. > Also I've followed the existing idiom of m_freem(m0); return NULL; > > I've checked that all assignments to k_flags are to fresh keys; the new > flag

Re: iwm(4): fix ccmp decrypt edge cases

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 03:47:02PM +1200, richard.n.proc...@gmail.com wrote: > > > I agree we should handle a missing key but suggest an alternative > > > approach > > > below. > > Hmm... your patch is surprisingly simple. I like it :) > > I am st

/bin/cp: Incorrect checking the return value

Incorrect checking the return value of malloc and system calls in /bin/cp. ok? Index: utils.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/cp/utils.c,v retrieving revision 1.48 diff -u -p -U10 -r1.48 utils.c --- utils.c 28 Jun 2019 13:34:58 -