I have no objection to this, but don't know the vagaries of the different compilers.

I think this is everything from RELNOTES and "Relnotes: yes" since 14.0, but I'll also cherry-pick from UPDATING. I'll also solicit input/review from developers@ when I have done what I can.

Seems like a good idea. I don't know atf usage well though.

Accepted, based mostly on Alan's previous approval.

Works on ZFS too; dataset added and home directory set up correctly.

This version works (adds the user correctly and defaults to not adding another user). Tested only on UFS; will test on ZFS in an hour or so.

I applied this change (only) and ran the script; I got:

I may not be the best reviewer for this change; I haven't used "local".

This change is essentially cosmetic, right (reduces confusion)? If so, then adding "No functional change intended" to the message might be appropriate.

The exp-run was successful.

exp-run requested (I think); https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=278623.

Add __BSD_VISIBLE.

In D44453#1018221, @koinec_yahoo.co.jp wrote:

In D44453#1017213, @karels wrote:

Is this project derived from Intel's code (see https://github.com/intel/intel_hfi)? It was originally GPL, but is now dual-licensed.

I understand that this github code has no origin.
I based this driver on FreeBSD's coretemp driver.

Since this is a serious topic related to licensing, I will explain it in a little more detail.
This github is the source code of the driver for Linux kernel, and I learned it.
However, the PowerManagement-related mechanisms are different between the Linux kernel and FreeBSD. In the Linux kernel, this is added to the existing thermal throtlling code, but FreeBSD does not have this mechanism.
Therefore, it is not possible to create the coredirector driver using the source code from this github.
As proof of this, for example, I needed to add the Local APIC's thermal interupt handler as a patch in Part 2.
Also, the table reference processing of Intel HFI/TD is simple, just referencing the table when an thermal interrupt occurs. I believe that if it were created based on the Intel SDM article, the process flow would be similar.

Is this project derived from Intel's code (see https://github.com/intel/intel_hfi)? It was originally GPL, but is now dual-licensed.

In D44453#1014665, @koinec_yahoo.co.jp wrote:

I'm sorry.
I tried uploading a full-context patch file from "Update Diff" in the upper right menu, but when I download it afterwards, only the modified parts are shown.
Since I don't know how to use this site, I will attach the full context file here.
If I'm wrong, please let me know how to upload it.

{F79832604}

fwiw, I've been experimenting with sched_ule changes for hybrid cores, although I have nothing worth committing yet. I'll be interested to see the rest of this.

I'm going to push this now, but please send me any additional comments.

Remove rollback warning, it is incorrect for 13.3. Add gve,
re-adding virtualization section.

Does -Wswitch require a default if all values of an enum are explicitly included? I don't know if that is common though.

Add vnode/vfs sysctl section from 14.0.

Various updates from out-of-band correspondence with involved parties;
update zlib revision; a few additions including clang.

John, I included you specifically for the last section on 32-bit systems, but I think you have at least one other item in here.

Has anyone else from docs looked at this? Anyone willing to approve?

Remove PowerPC updating note (probably no longer applies);
correct sentence about "new in this release unless marked MERGED";
remove section about i386 CPUTYPE.

Is the following summary accurate: This change is not required for all systems, but doesn't hurt; it makes it easier for some configurations. If that's true, then I don't have a problem with it.

Seems like the same list as -CURRENT, right? That should be correct.

Looks right to me.

Anyone from manpages want to approve this?

Looks good, I can approve for releng; someone from docs should approve, though, and commit if necessary.

In D43466#990869, @olce wrote:

In D43466#990866, @dvl wrote:

I think you're saying why have a command-line switch when we have the in-conf-file option?

I was just trying to guess the reasoning for the removal of this command-line option, by stating one possible inference, since I anticipate that the use of -c is infrequent and it's always possible for the administrator to change the configuration file (well, I also can see situations where these are not equivalent...). Personally, I don't have a need to remove it, and at the same time I'll likely never use it, in that sense I'm neutral.

Use local variables to factor out parts of long expression, simplify

I tried formatting the check as a separate function, and that doesn't help much. The main part of the expression (computing the host part) still doesn't fit on one line. I think I'll leave it as it is.