Our devel/boost uses waitid(2) but OpenBSD does not implement it yet.
In file included from /usr/local/include/boost/process.hpp:25:
In file included from /usr/local/include/boost/process/group.hpp:32:
/usr/local/include/boost/process/detail/posix/wait_group.hpp:38:17: error: no
member named 'wai
On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 02:41:47AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> [IN] looks strange. If this field modified after creation it is
> mutable. There are cases when such field could modified only once,
> but it still is atomic.
>
> We have cases where we do assignment only once, like `unp_addr’
>
BIO_new_mem_buf has had const since 2018, so this workaround is no
longer needed.
Index: ssl.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/relayd/ssl.c,v
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -u -p -r1.35 ssl.c
--- ssl.c 27 Jan 2021 20:33:05 -
[IN] looks strange. If this field modified after creation it is
mutable. There are cases when such field could modified only once,
but it still is atomic.
We have cases where we do assignment only once, like `unp_addr’
when we bind(2)ing socket and we don’t modify if until socket’s
destruction. Si
Hi,
I have started documenting the locking strategy of struct tdb fields.
Note that gettdb_dir() is MP safe now.
In udpencap_ctlinput() we had an unprotected access to tdb_snext.
Grab the tdb_sadb_mtx mutex there. Make the braces consistently
for all these loops.
Move NET_ASSERT_LOCKED() into t
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 01:17:14AM +, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:09:40PM +, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> > Run on boot without arguments, netstart(8) creates all virtual
> > interfaces *for which hostname.if files exist* before configuring them.
> >
> > This prevents order
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:04:04AM -0600, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 10:50:32PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > On 24/11/21(Wed) 11:16, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > Diff below unlock the bottom part of the UVM fault handler. I'm
> > > interested in squashing the remaining bug
On Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:25:59 +, Visa Hankala wrote:
> In simple cases that do not have out-of-band data, the system can skip
> registering the EVFILT_EXCEPT filter. A new flag could indicate when
> the registration is done for select(2). The patch below does the
> tweaking for FIFOs and pipes,
> On 7 Dec 2021, at 18:31, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In ipo_tdb the flow contains a reference counted TDB cache. This
> may prevent that tdb_free() is called. It is not a real leak as
> ipsecctl -F or termination of iked flush this cache. The kernel
> does the cleanup itself if we mo
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 08:40:53AM -0700, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:05:39 +, Visa Hankala wrote:
>
> > This adds EVFILT_EXCEPT handler for pipes. It is a subset of
> > EVFILT_READ; it triggers on EOF only. This captures the POLLHUP
> > condition of pipe_poll(), used with s
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 10:50:32PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 24/11/21(Wed) 11:16, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > Diff below unlock the bottom part of the UVM fault handler. I'm
> > interested in squashing the remaining bugs. Please test with your usual
> > setup & report back.
>
> Thanks to
On Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:05:39 +, Visa Hankala wrote:
> This adds EVFILT_EXCEPT handler for pipes. It is a subset of
> EVFILT_READ; it triggers on EOF only. This captures the POLLHUP
> condition of pipe_poll(), used with select(2)'s exceptfds and when
> poll(2) has events without (POLLIN | POLLR
Hi,
In ipo_tdb the flow contains a reference counted TDB cache. This
may prevent that tdb_free() is called. It is not a real leak as
ipsecctl -F or termination of iked flush this cache. The kernel
does the cleanup itself if we move the code from tdb_free() to
tdb_delete().
ok?
bluhm
Index: n
On Mon, 06 Dec 2021 22:37:02 -0600, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> lsearch(3) is just lfind(3) + append. If we write it that way we
> shrink lsearch.c. The third function, linear_base(), is just added
> complexity. The indirection buys us nothing.
>
> I don't think we need to keep the historical commen
On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 10:37:02PM -0600, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> lsearch(3) is just lfind(3) + append. If we write it that way we
> shrink lsearch.c. The third function, linear_base(), is just added
> complexity. The indirection buys us nothing.
>
> I don't think we need to keep the historical
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 01:08:45PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 11:30:48 +0100
> > From: Anton Lindqvist
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 10:25:34PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 21:45:03 +0100
> > > > From: Anton Lindqvist
> > > >
> > > > On
> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 11:30:48 +0100
> From: Anton Lindqvist
>
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 10:25:34PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 21:45:03 +0100
> > > From: Anton Lindqvist
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 09:23:45PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > > Date: Mon
On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 10:25:34PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 21:45:03 +0100
> > From: Anton Lindqvist
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 09:23:45PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 21:08:04 +0100
> > > > From: Patrick Wildt
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
>
anyone else?
On 2021-12-04 17:26 -07, Joel Knight wrote:
> We have a winner here. I tested from INIT through to REBINDING and the
> behavior matches what's in the RFC now. ok joel@
>
> One cosmetic thing I noticed this time around: log_dhcp_hdr() in
> engine.c should be printing dhcp_hdr->xid i
19 matches
Mail list logo
