Re: numbers don't lie ...

2006-09-19 Thread Michael Vince
Danny Braniss wrote: Im testing these 2 boxes, Sun X4100 and Dell-2950, and: SUN X4100: Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 280 (2393.19-MHz K8-class CPU) one 70g sata disk DELL 2950: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz (3192.98-MHz K8-class CPU)

Re: Symlinks on read-only FS

2006-09-19 Thread Deomid Ryabkov
Perry Hutchison wrote: So the sort of write access being validated here would be writing to the symlink itself (i.e. the definition)? symlinks are dereferenced during name lookup and are not affected by the write mount options of the filesystems they reside on. you can open a file for write by

Re: Symlinks on read-only FS

2006-09-19 Thread Perry Hutchison
> > Is the inclusion of VLNK here correct? I would think that > > only the target of the symlink should matter: if it happens > > to point onto a writable FS, the fact that the symlink itself > > is on a ROFS should not matter. > > yes, it is correct. > short symbolic links are stored in the inod

Re: Symlinks on read-only FS

2006-09-19 Thread Deomid Ryabkov
Perry Hutchison wrote: Is the inclusion of VLNK here correct? I would think that only the target of the symlink should matter: if it happens to point onto a writable FS, the fact that the symlink itself is on a ROFS should not matter. yes, it is correct. short symbolic links are stored in th

Symlinks on read-only FS

2006-09-19 Thread Perry Hutchison
I've just noticed this, in ufs/ufs/ufs_vnops.c:ufs_access() /* * Disallow write attempts on read-only filesystems; * unless the file is a socket, fifo, or a block or * character device resident on the filesystem. */ if (mode & VWRITE) { switch (vp->v_type) {

Re: Delivering SIGKILL to init

2006-09-19 Thread Peter Jeremy
On Tue, 2006-Sep-19 17:55:50 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: >Prompted by some discussion elsewhere, I've been trying to send >SIGKILL to init. If I ktrace kill(1), I can see "kill(1,9)" which >returns 0 but the signal is never delivered. If I sent (eg) SIGXCPU >then init dies and the kernel panics (a

Re: numbers don't lie ...

2006-09-19 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 04:11:12PM +0400, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > OF> Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently > OF> fast processors. > OF> > OF> Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and > OF> repeat the benchmar

6.2/pxe blues, was Re: pxe boot size limit?

2006-09-19 Thread Danny Braniss
> it seems that pxeboot has a limit with respect to the kernel size, > which prevents the kernel to get loaded, the error printed is > slightly misleading. > > the solution is to make a kernel with loadable modules, instead of > compiled in. not entirely true :-( but changing kernel size has diff

Re: numbers don't lie ...

2006-09-19 Thread Dmitry Morozovsky
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: OF> Because buildworld is I/O-bound on systems with sufficiently OF> fast processors. OF> OF> Try putting the contents of /usr/src into a RAM disk and OF> repeat the benchmark. The numbers might look a little OF> different then. Of course, you should ha

Re: jail2 patchset 12

2006-09-19 Thread Alex Lyashkov
thanks for point this :( i will rewrite old jail api as wrapper to new API for avoid similar errors... В Втр, 19.09.2006, в 00:50, John Baldwin пишет: > On Sunday 17 September 2006 18:08, Alex Lyashkov wrote: > > Thanks for you report. I really more test new jail2 API then old :( > > Please apply

Delivering SIGKILL to init

2006-09-19 Thread Peter Jeremy
Prompted by some discussion elsewhere, I've been trying to send SIGKILL to init. If I ktrace kill(1), I can see "kill(1,9)" which returns 0 but the signal is never delivered. If I sent (eg) SIGXCPU then init dies and the kernel panics (as expected). I've looked through sys/kern/kern_* and can't