On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 11:58:31PM -0500, Johan Huldtgren wrote:
> hello,
>
[skip]
>
> Would this apply against 7.4 or only -current? Machine is currently
> running 7.4+syspatches (and sashan@ patch from earlier in this thread)
> if I need to get on -current that's not a big deal it would
While hunting for why the jdk's stack overflow execptions were randomly
not working, I determined the root cause was that pthread_main_np(3)
randomly fails to work properly. Reproduced on sparc64, amd64, and
aarch64. On i386 the standalone test program doesn't reproduce the
problem. However, I obs
How about that diff.
Index: include/tib.h
===
RCS file: /OpenBSD/src/include/tib.h,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -p -r1.9 tib.h
--- include/tib.h 27 Dec 2022 07:44:56 - 1.9
+++ include/tib.h 8 Dec 2023 15:24:4
On Dec 8, 2023, at 10:25 AM, Miod Vallat wrote:
>
> How about that diff.
>
Tested on amd64 and it does indeed fix the problem. This is clearly
the cause. okay kurt@
> Index: include/tib.h
> ===
> RCS file: /OpenBSD/src/include/tib
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 03:25:21PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
> How about that diff.
Should the tib_tid also be initialized?
>
> Index: include/tib.h
> ===
> RCS file: /OpenBSD/src/include/tib.h,v
> retrieving revision 1.9
> diff -u
> Should the tib_tid also be initialized?
I don't think so, it is initialized outside of the TIB_INIT macro. See
e.g. setup_static_tib().
On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 06:14:30PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> Here id the diff. I introduces `sc_mtx' mutex(9) to protect the most of
> pflow_softc structure. The `send_nam', `sc_flowsrc' and `sc_flowdst' are
> prtected by `sc_lock' rwlock(9). `sc_tmpl_ipfix' is immutable.
>
> Also, the pf
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 11:36:31PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 06:14:30PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > Here id the diff. I introduces `sc_mtx' mutex(9) to protect the most of
> > pflow_softc structure. The `send_nam', `sc_flowsrc' and `sc_flowdst' are
> > prtecte
On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 02:07:06AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > > SLIST_ENTRY(pflow_softc) sc_next;
> >
> > This list is protected by net lock. Can you add an [N] here?
> >
>
> This is not true. The netlock is not taken while export_pflow() called
> from pf_purge_states(). I privately
On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 12:28:10AM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 02:07:06AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > > > SLIST_ENTRY(pflow_softc) sc_next;
> > >
> > > This list is protected by net lock. Can you add an [N] here?
> > >
> >
> > This is not true. The ne
10 matches
Mail list logo
