Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Giorgos Keramidas writes: > atoi() doesn't really have error checking and it does not necessarily > affect `errno'. man 3 expand_number And please don't call it SPEED or WRITE_SPEED or anything generic; call it BURNCD_SPEED or CDROM_BURN_SPEED or something unambiguous. The envar used to specify

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:00:43 +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas writes: >> atoi() doesn't really have error checking and it does not necessarily >> affect `errno'. > > man 3 expand_number I know, but thanks. In this case, expand_number's logic for parsing possible SI suffixes

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Giorgos Keramidas writes: > Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > > man 3 expand_number > I know, but thanks. In this case, expand_number's logic for parsing > possible SI suffixes is not useful and may be slightly confusing. > > I'm not sure what CDROM_SPEED='4m' would mean for burncd's -s option, > for

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: > On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:47:40 +0100 (CET), Alexander Best > wrote: > > any thoughts on these small changes to burncd? > > Index: usr.sbin/burncd/burncd.c > > === > > --- usr.sbin/burncd/burnc

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:28:29 +0100 (CET), Alexander Best wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: >> Hi Alexander, > >> The idea seems very good, but since the value of SPEED is user >> supplied data, I would rather see a bit of validation code after >> getenv(). With this version of th

Re: Why is default value of NKPT so small? mfsroot

2009-11-09 Thread John Baldwin
On Friday 06 November 2009 2:19:51 pm Trever wrote: > Does anyone know what the thinking is behind the default value of NKTP in > /usr/src/sys/i386/include/pmap.h? > > It seems to me that it's too small, though I'm wondering if there are some > considerations in changing it's value that I should

Re: mmap(2) with MAP_ANON honouring offset although it shouldn't

2009-11-09 Thread John Baldwin
On Saturday 07 November 2009 9:19:05 pm Alexander Best wrote: > no problem. i've sent the final patch as followup to kern/71258 and also > attached it to this message. to make it short. what's being changed by the > patch: > > 1) if MAP_ANON is defined and offset !=0 > return EINVAL > 2) if

Re: mmap(2) with MAP_ANON honouring offset although it shouldn't

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
John Baldwin schrieb am 2009-11-09: > On Saturday 07 November 2009 9:19:05 pm Alexander Best wrote: > > no problem. i've sent the final patch as followup to kern/71258 and > > also > > attached it to this message. to make it short. what's being changed > > by the > > patch: > > 1) if MAP_ANON is d

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: > On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:28:29 +0100 (CET), Alexander Best > wrote: > > Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: > >> Hi Alexander, > >> The idea seems very good, but since the value of SPEED is user > >> supplied data, I would rather see a bit of validati

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:01:43 +0100 (CET), Alexander Best wrote: >Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: >> > i don't quite get why the value supplied with the envar has to be >> > validated. if the user supplies a speed value using the -s switch >> > no validation (except <= 0) is being perfor

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: > On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:01:43 +0100 (CET), Alexander Best > wrote: > >Giorgos Keramidas schrieb am 2009-11-09: > >> > i don't quite get why the value supplied with the envar has to > >> > be > >> > validated. if the user supplies a speed value using the -

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
here's the final patch. would be great if somebody could commit this one. the only thing i'm not 100% sure about are the burncd(8) changes. i'm not that familiar with the man syntax. thanks go out to keramida@ and des@ for their help. alex ...just realised the topic makes no sense. ;) what i mea

help needed to fix contrib/ee crash/exit when receiving SIGWINCH

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
since you've tested the patch on 7-stable do think it's mature enough to be committed to that branch? alex ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ha

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Alexander Best writes: > > + if ((env_speed = getenv("BURNCD_SPEED")) != NULL) { > + if (strcasecmp("max", env_speed) == 0) > + speed = CDR_MAX_SPEED; > + else > + speed = atoi(env_speed) * 177; > + if (speed <= 0) >

Re: [patch] burncd: honour for envar SPEED

2009-11-09 Thread Alexander Best
Dag-Erling Smørgrav schrieb am 2009-11-09: > Alexander Best writes: > > + if ((env_speed = getenv("BURNCD_SPEED")) != NULL) { > > + if (strcasecmp("max", env_speed) == 0) > > + speed = CDR_MAX_SPEED; > > + else > > + speed = atoi

Re: heci: a new driver for review and testing

2009-11-09 Thread Gavin Atkinson
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009, Andriy Gapon wrote: Some time ago I posted some ideas about HECI/MEI driver for FreeBSD: http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4968E9A1.3080006 I actually got around to implementing it (in initial/basic form): http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/heci.tgz Nice! I've got the follo