It's probably better to call sysctl_ctx_init for the stat_ctx, when priv->sysctl is assigned. Or just moving the ctx_inits and sysctl assignment to common place. TAILQ requires explicit initialization, and we normally treat sysctl_ctx as opaque struct in drivers.
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
Dec 21 2016
Dec 20 2016
In D8789#183254, @kib wrote:In D8789#183250, @kib wrote:In D8789#183231, @sepherosa_gmail.com wrote:In D8789#183203, @kib wrote:So you did not added support to 32bit libc. Why ?
It currently requires mulq, which is not available on 32 bits system.
The code doesn't require 128bit multiplication support, it is useful for optimization but not critical. It is possible to express the same calculation using the big numbers multiplication (or, if you prefer it, a term from russian elementary school, 'multiplication in column').
If 64bit values are X=a*g+b and Y=c*g+d, where g is 2^32, a,b, and c,d are 32bit high and low words of the corresponding 64bit values, then X*Y = a*c*g*g + (a*d + b*c)*g + b*d. You need to care about the carry bit. It is slightly more cumbersome then mulq, but not too complicated.
You could copy/paste the code from contrib/libcompiler_rt/lib/builtins/multi3.c, the __mulddi3() function.
Dec 19 2016
In D8789#183203, @kib wrote:So you did not added support to 32bit libc. Why ?
Dec 16 2016
Dec 15 2016
Dec 14 2016
Use d_open to prevent write mmap, pointed out by kib
Dec 13 2016
Add compiler fence through atomic_*_acq, suggested by kib
Dec 12 2016
Fix reversed logic
Fallback to other timecounter's tc_get_timecount is not a good idea.
Dec 9 2016
Dec 8 2016
Dec 7 2016
Dec 1 2016
Nov 30 2016
In D8656#179616, @jhb wrote:If you don't need the timeout, that is fine to remove of course. If you need the timeout for other reasons, see if rS309148 fixes the panics for you.
Nov 28 2016
Nov 25 2016
Nov 23 2016
Nov 22 2016
Nov 21 2016
Nov 18 2016
Nov 17 2016
Allow double-orphan on destroy path. Make the life easier for xact API consumers.
Nov 15 2016
Nov 14 2016
Nov 10 2016
Nov 9 2016
The try lock scheme you have used will cause two types of issues:
Nov 8 2016
Nov 3 2016
In D8409#175275, @jhb wrote:This looks fine. Note that there is some existing code this somewhat duplicates. For example, the ACPI Host-PCI bridge driver also parses _CRS to determine valid ranges. It uses the pcib_host_res_* API to add those ranges to a list that it then iterates on allocation requests. I'm not sure if does the same trick of preferring > 4G ranges for 64-bit BARs (though if pcib_host_res_*() would otherwise work for you I'd be fine with fixing it to do the same).
Nov 2 2016
Ship it!
Ship it!