Re: Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-08-02 Thread David Chisnall
On 2 Aug 2023, at 00:33, Rick Macklem wrote: > > Just trying to understand what you are suggesting... > 1 - Declare the variable _Atomic(int) OR atomic_int (is there a preference) > and > not volatile. Either is fine (the latter is a typedef for the former). I am not a huge fan of the typ

Re: Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-08-02 Thread Rick Macklem
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 11:33 PM David Chisnall wrote: > > Hi, > > This bit of the C spec is a bit of a mess. There was, I believe, a desire to > return volatile to its original use and make any use of volatile other than > MMIO discouraged. This broke too much legacy code and so now it’s a conf

Re: Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-08-02 Thread Peter Eriksson
Interesting discussion regarding sig_atomic_t, volatile & stuff. It seems I opened a can of worms. Sorry :-) Anyway here are the references I had read when suggesting this change: C89: - http://port70.net/~nsz/c/c99/n1256.html#7.14p2 CERT C Coding Standard: - https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluen

Re: Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-08-02 Thread Rick Macklem
On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 6:14 PM Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 04:33:16PM -0700, Rick Macklem wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 11:33 PM David Chisnall > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This bit of the C spec is a bit of a mess. There was, I believe, a desire > > >

Re: sys/modules/Makefile and MACHINE_ARCH vs arm64 (in use) vs aarch64 (not in use) VS. man arch; also COMPAT_FREEBSD32_ENABLED use

2023-08-02 Thread Warner Losh
Those all look wrong to me. Warner On Wed, Aug 2, 2023, 11:27 AM Mark Millard wrote: > man arch reports: > >MACHINE MACHINE_CPUARCH MACHINE_ARCH >arm64 aarch64 aarch64 > . . . >arm arm armv6, armv7

Re: sys/modules/Makefile and MACHINE_ARCH vs arm64 (in use) vs aarch64 (not in use) VS. man arch; also COMPAT_FREEBSD32_ENABLED use

2023-08-02 Thread Mark Millard
On Aug 2, 2023, at 11:16, Warner Losh wrote: > Those all look wrong to me. > > Warner > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2023, 11:27 AM Mark Millard wrote: > man arch reports: > >MACHINE MACHINE_CPUARCH MACHINE_ARCH >arm64 aarch64 aarch64 > . . . >

Re: sys/modules/Makefile and MACHINE_ARCH vs arm64 (in use) vs aarch64 (not in use) VS. man arch; also COMPAT_FREEBSD32_ENABLED use

2023-08-02 Thread Mark Millard
On Aug 2, 2023, at 12:56, Mark Millard wrote: > On Aug 2, 2023, at 11:16, Warner Losh wrote: > >> Those all look wrong to me. >> >> Warner >> >> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023, 11:27 AM Mark Millard wrote: >> man arch reports: >> >> MACHINE MACHINE_CPUARCH MACHINE_ARCH >>

sys/modules/Makefile and MACHINE_ARCH vs arm64 (in use) vs aarch64 (not in use) VS. man arch; also COMPAT_FREEBSD32_ENABLED use

2023-08-02 Thread Mark Millard
man arch reports: MACHINE MACHINE_CPUARCH MACHINE_ARCH arm64 aarch64 aarch64 . . . arm arm armv6, armv7 So I'd not expect arm64 in MACHINE_ARCH . But sys/modules/Makefile has (from a grep for MACHINE_AR

Re: Review of patch that uses "volatile sig_atomic_t"

2023-08-02 Thread Konstantin Belousov
On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 04:33:16PM -0700, Rick Macklem wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 11:33 PM David Chisnall wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > This bit of the C spec is a bit of a mess. There was, I believe, a desire > > to return volatile to its original use and make any use of volatile other > > t

Bhyve NIC Passthru broken

2023-08-02 Thread skorpio dr
Hello, Starting a vm (FreeBSD 13.2) with passthru NIC results a constant flood of error messages on the host (FreeBSD 14-CURRENT). The NIC refuses to work in the vm (it works on the host if I turn off the passthru). This problem is persistent since 13.1-Release. (Sidenote: the passthru mostly work