unsubscribe
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
joy ganguly wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Hi,
>
>I want to use mmap as a means of doing IPC between
>unrelated processes. I do *not* want the data to hit
>the disk. So this is what I do :-
>
>fd = open(file, O_RDWR);
>p = mmap(fd, MAP_NOSYNC | MAP_SHARED);
>mlock(p, len);
>
>/* Whack around with shmem */
>
about that... Hope this helps...
ANdy
Ferruccio Vitale wrote:
>Andy Sporner wrote:
>
>>man ktread_shutdown
>>
>>To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
>>
>
>I can&
Ferruccio Vitale wrote:
>Hi,
>
>how can I destroy a kernel thread that I previously created?
>Regards,
>
>Ferruccio
>
>
>To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
>
>
man ktread_shutdown
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PR
Terry Lambert wrote:
>Andy Sporner wrote:
>
>>Hi Hackers,
>>
>>I would really like to have some input otherwise I might consider how
>>usefull my
>>participation on this list really is...
>>
>
>Well, far be it for me not to comment, particularly i
Julian Elischer wrote:
>ah that one.
>I have no view then :-)
>(I have the gutt feeling it must be doable in some other way..
>but can't think of it now..)
>
:-) I looked at jails, but they put too much other restrictions. It is
funny sometimes how you discover things by looking at source code
Hi Hackers,
I would really like to have some input otherwise I might consider how
usefull my
participation on this list really is...
Thanks!
Andy
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Sorry,
Forgot this one:
(cse.h)
#ifndef _SYS_CSE_H_
#define _SYS_CSE_H_
/*
* One structure allocated per session.
*/
struct csed {
int cse_c_id; /* ID Number of Application */
/* These next fields are not being used yet, but soon... */
int cse
Hi hackers,
I had a need to track all processes including daemons that become owned
by init that started from a process for my statistics collection function of
my clustering software.
The basic idea is to add a structure to the 'proc' structure to keep current
and future data in and to be able
>
>
>
>Does this look like a driver bug, a hardware fault or all of the
>above? I realise the realtek chips are not the best, but they
>shouldn't cause a box to fall over :)
>
>Here are the details from the core dumps I got, which led me to
>
Hi,
I had (in the words of Andrew Lloyd Webber) some
"
Hello Hackers,
I have a need to add a structure to "proc" structure for additional
statistics for my clustering
project.
Is this a 'holy' structure where such an addition is possible? Are
there limitations?
Suggestions?
Thanks!
Andy
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
aaron wrote:
Hi,
Maybe it's just me, but I always include the fundamental .h files first, so
usually in this order (more or less):
#include
#include
... (networking stuff)
#include
#include
So perhaps this is why I never saw this. It is a simple philosophy and so
far hasn't caused me
Greg Black wrote:
>Andy Sporner wrote irrelevant stuff:
>
>| Tore Lund wrote more irrelevant stuff:
>
>Please take this debate off the hackers list. It has nothing to
>do with the list's charter and is therefore unwelcome.
>
>Greg
>
>
I disagree because
Tore Lund wrote:
>>Better Idea, how about changing MajorDomo to accept mail only from people
>>registered on the list. OK. This would inconvience some people. But in
>>addition
>>to this, as most people are, I am also getting tired of the sex
>>advertisements.
>>
>
>The reason for the inconven
Aragon Gouveia wrote:
>Can this sender be rejected at the MTA?
>
Better Idea, how about changing MajorDomo to accept mail only from people
registered on the list. OK. This would inconvience some people. But in
addition
to this, as most people are, I am also getting tired of the sex
advertis
Thanks for the post about netgraph. All the better when you don't have
to do any work...
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Gary Stanley wrote:
> Is it possible to split the load of IP traffic with 2 ethernet cards
> on a 4.x machine? I'm new to "load balancing" in a sense, however, I'd
> like to try something that seems more "robust"
I didn't know about the 'fec' adapter (might be a good starting point).
I have
Hi,
Some time ago you were looking for a name for "the Fish".
Since your work now is including VINUM, perhaps a name
would be better "xsysconfig" or "xsysadm"
Since the Vinum stuff follows a similar paradyme as I had
to solve with my cluster failover stuff. You might want to
look at my UI.
Hi,
I hate to jump into this fray, but if this is going to be a public
thread, will
everybody make the reply to the list??? :-) So far I only see Terry's
emails.
Thanks!
Andy
Terry Lambert wrote:
>Robert Watson wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Terry Lambert wrote:
>>
The reality is t
I have submitted a form for a presentation. I can only hope it is accepted.
Thanks for all of your comments! :-)
Andy
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Hi,
I heard some random comment here about a possible convention (sort of like
BSDCon) in Europe. Does anyone know about this or if there is going to be
such a thing?
I have an interest to present either on Clustering or perhaps if the
timing is
right, a feature I am working on to bundle ether
Ok :-)
I am caught. I hit the send key by accident when I realized I had misread
the question.
> Andy, what were you trying to say?
>
> Or is that the way the Linux kernel converts addresses?
>
Probably! :-)
Have you a name yet for 'fish?'
Andy
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROT
On 04-Mar-02 Valery N. Khromov wrote:
> I'd like to develop a kernel module for FreeBSD, able to read & write
> directly to VGA text-mode screen buffer. I know that this buffer is located
> at 0xB8000 in physical address space. But in kernel I must address it using
> kernel virtual address space.
>
> C++ doesn't add noticable overhead and isn't slow, unless you are a
> dumbass about how you write it. All languages give you plenty of ways
> to write speghetti fortran code :-). C++ gives you a number of ways
> to obfuscate.
>
I hate to enter such a fray, but I can pass on my experience
Hi Terry (and other snoopers--readers :-))
>
> I guess I should ask you if this is an SMP system and/or
> is the kernel compiled for SMP, or ist it UP (this is a
> two by two marix, so the correct answer is not "yes/no" 8-)).
Monoproc machine. Standard (OUT of box config file -- GENERIC).
Sorry
be subjected to the sharing of interrupt
situation.
>
> Alternately, you could ask Bill Paul, since he's a better
> choice than me on this sort of thing, anyway. 8-) 8-).
>
> Hope this is useful, even if it doesn't come right out
> and say "her
Hi Terry (and others!)
You seem to know a lot about the kernel (as you always expand on my
"Cliff Notes" versions of my answers). Can you give me any hints on
the device driver question I posted a few days ago. There was a
response, however I don't see how it applies for these reasons.
1.
Hi,
>
> Is there a way to read user-land environ(7) table from the kernel for a
> given process ?
You have to look at the "proc" structure for a process and there you will
find a buffer for the 'ps_strings' and a few offset variables to show where
the environment variables are.
Andy
>
> Chee
Hi,
Try this for software:
http://www.picobsd.org
As for hardware perhaps the Mini-biscuit PC from advantech. I
just looked at found one that uses a 486 DX-66 with up to 32 MB
EDD RAM one compactflash socket and ethernet (CPC-2245-3200). It
goes for about 280 Euro and the development board for
Hi,
I hope I understand your question correctly, The place you want
to look at is in a file in ~sys/kern/uipc_socket.c. The function
is 'sosetopt' and is called from ~sys/kern/uipc_syscalls.c.
Additionally look in ~sys/sys/socket_var.h at the definition of
the socket structure.
Hope this help
somebody can give me a hint of where I should look. It seems that
the PCI performance on FreeBSD is much faster in talking to this particular
devic.
Many thanks in advance!
Andy Sporner
PS: Here is the relavent attach() code for both systems:
NetBSD:
/*
* galnet_attach()
*
* Here is where
31 matches
Mail list logo
