> OK - you can probably achieve that by setting the retry limit to
> be 1, setting CWmin to be very small. However, you'll need to make
> sure that both machines transmissions are synchronised to better
> than 20us (which is no mean feat), otherwise carrier sense will
> foil your plan!
I just had
Scott Long wrote:
Felix-KM wrote:
I can't understand how to use the function copyout().
It is necessary to write the data from a device driver to the
array defined in user program.
I do it this way:
#define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
What you've declared here is an ioctl that will
Felix-KM wrote:
I can't understand how to use the function copyout().
It is necessary to write the data from a device driver to the
array defined in user program.
I do it this way:
#define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
What you've declared here is an ioctl that will copy in 4 bytes of
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2005-07-25 18:14, Felix-KM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have no idea if it is possible for ioctls to have mapped more than
a few 100 bytes for data exchange. You should use read and uiomove()
instead.
So if I get it right, it's impossible in FreeBSD to gain acces
Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
Im not sure of the bug in your code, but you have got
to assume that copyout() would fail if the user/kernel
addr passed to it is not accessible.
regards
-kamal
The whole point of copyin and copyout is to deal with copying
to and from user virtual memory that might not
Felix-KM wrote:
#define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
I think the third parameter to _IOWR should directly specify a type,
e.g. _IOWR("F", 127, int) or _IOWR("F", 127, struct MyStruct).
driver
struct my_softc {
...
short unsigned int B;
};
...
static int
my_io
Thanks for that we have ~40 new supermicro's with new
Adaptec SATA controller's which we currently have to
use windows on due to lack of 5.4 support. So this is
very good news for us.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Leubner, Achim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Our plan is to integrate
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Felix-KM wrote:
In the Linux driver Ioctl is realized with the macroses _put_user
_get_user all over it. As I understand in FreeBSD their analogues are
functions described in store(9), copy(9) and fetch(9).
Linux doesn't provide any help for driver IOCTL routines, FreeBSD
>
> > So if I get it right, it's impossible in FreeBSD to gain access to
> > 64KB of user's program memory with ioctl?
> >
> > My situation is this - I have a device driver for Linux. My task is
> > port it as it is (1:1) into FreeBSD.
> >
> > In the Linux driver Ioctl is realized with the macroses
On 2005-07-25 18:14, Felix-KM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I have no idea if it is possible for ioctls to have mapped more than
> >a few 100 bytes for data exchange. You should use read and uiomove()
> >instead.
>
> So if I get it right, it's impossible in FreeBSD to gain access to
> 64KB of use
>> #define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
>
>I think the third parameter to _IOWR should directly specify a type,
>e.g. _IOWR("F", 127, int) or _IOWR("F", 127, struct MyStruct).
>
>>
>> driver
>>
>> struct my_softc {
>> ...
>> short unsigned int B;
>> };
>>
>> ...
>>
>> static
> #define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
I think the third parameter to _IOWR should directly specify a type,
e.g. _IOWR("F", 127, int) or _IOWR("F", 127, struct MyStruct).
>
> driver
>
> struct my_softc {
> ...
> short unsigned int B;
> };
>
> ...
>
> static int
> my_ioctl(s
Im not sure of the bug in your code, but you have got
to assume that copyout() would fail if the user/kernel
addr passed to it is not accessible.
regards
-kamal
--- Felix-KM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't understand how to use the function
> copyout().
> It is necessary to write the data
Our plan is to integrate the patch into the 6.0-CURRENT and to make
driver update packages for 5.3/5.4 to support the new controllers on
these OS versions too.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Hartland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Montag, 25. Juli 2005 14:45
To: Leubner, Achim; David
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 04:35:20PM +0400, Felix-KM wrote:
> I can't understand how to use the function copyout().
> It is necessary to write the data from a device driver to the
> array defined in user program.
> I do it this way:
>
> #define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
> Here I get EFA
Are these going to be back ported to 5.4 or is this going to be
a 6.0 only thing?
Steve / K
- Original Message -
From: "Leubner, Achim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Yes, there are plans to support the Adaptec 2610SA and other new Adaptec
controllers. I already sent a patch to Scott Long and
I can't understand how to use the function copyout().
It is necessary to write the data from a device driver to the
array defined in user program.
I do it this way:
#define IOCTL_GET_B_IOWR("F", 127, 0x4)
driver
struct my_softc {
...
short unsigned int B;
};
...
static int
my_i
Yes, there are plans to support the Adaptec 2610SA and other new Adaptec
controllers. I already sent a patch to Scott Long and I think the
support will be integrated soon after a test phase.
===
Achim Leubner
Software Engineer / RAID drivers
ICP vortex GmbH / Adaptec Inc.
Phone
This has been floating around on a google search for a while. Are
there any plans to include it? It would be welcome functionality.
I have tested it and it is working fine.
Thanks
Dave
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- aac_pci.c.orig Mon Jul 25 20:11:34 2005
+++ aac_pci.c Mon Jul 25 20:15:3
19 matches
Mail list logo
