Some concerns were raised with this commit.

Reopening to be able to update revision

Can someone from office take a look and/or approve instead of riding on exp-run results (like in the past)? After what happened to bug 246767 I'm not confident portmgr would perform exp-run before approval anymore.

Rebase and fix libreoffice6 (unlike 7.x one more patch), openjfx14 (webkit inside)

Looks good modulo indentation issue.

Env vars are good for per user things... but less good for system wide things. It would be better to honor it if set, but populate it from the sysctl. Rc.conf variables also aren't all caps or apply to multiple scripts... something to consider. Also, for setuid binaries (nor relevant here) you can't use env cars, so you need some fallback...

Isn't errno different in linux on different architectures? I know that at least alpha had a very different errno than x86..

Where is the error table? Did you forget to add it to the diff?

I was about to upload a different patch that uses the environment. I'd rather take it in that direction since there's already a strong precedence for acquiring LOCALBASE from the environment. Need to finish the man page then I'll upload it. Please hold off on this.

Ah I didn't see the URL above :)

In D27002#602351, @allanjude wrote:

If booting from EFI, updating gptzfsboot won't do anything. We likely need additional documentation on actually updating the contents of the ESP as well.

IHI0048A for the GICv1 Architecture Specification, Chapter 4.3.6 on the Interrupt Clear-Enable Registers (ICDICERn):

Subsumed into D26691.

In D26975#602470, @mmel wrote:

But, please, can you post full verbose bool log from this system? Thanks.

In D26975#602470, @mmel wrote:

In D26975#602036, @cyprien_cypou.net wrote:

I think from GICv2 it would be assumed that the OS could write to the SGI bits. Software cannot know all existing implementations.

I'm sorry but my interpretation of this fact is exactly opposite. Because software cannot know all existing implementations (thus it cannot predict exact functionality of these bits) we are not allowed to blindly change it. Mainly if TRM for given parts exactly specifies this register as RO...

@trasz Do we have a good regression suite I can try? How difficult / big is running something like LTP?

OCF does not currently have algorithms for SHA 512/256 or SHA 512/224. It does support SHA 224 (which is SHA 256/224) and SHA 384 (which is SHA 512/384). Adding support for additional algorithms is fairly straightforward. You would need to add constants and simple software versions (as we always want a fallback so kernel consumers can depend on an algorithm existing) and ideally tests in cryptocheck. Ideally there would be at least one in-kernel consumer for an algorithm though. I think the use case for SHA 512/256 is ZFS?

Stub wasn't sufficient; chrome self-tests that disabling dump is reflected in
subsequent GET. Instead, proxy the prctl to the similar procctl PROC_TRACE.

In D26948#602475, @bcr wrote:

I only know that I know nothing...

Thanks for the review!

Thanks for the review!