@jrm given I am not a ports committer how do I proceed? I assume I need an Approved by: line from someone?

Rework a bit to reduce duplication.

Looks good to me. Thanks.

Included the important Reported by in the commit. Thanks.

Better indeed to return ENXIO early in g_vfs_open() and remove the special case for 0 in vnode_create_vobject(). Thanks.

"Access and friends provide a good first guess if a future open might succeed." Might be good to insert at the start. Or "access, eaccess and faccessat provide..." and change the list at the start of the next sentence to "These system calls".

Must have done something wrong. I'll figure it out eventually. Plan to get arcanist going asap. Generally looks good! Thanks!

Hi Chris,

In D45287#1033199, @rlibby wrote:

In D45287#1033196, @jhibbits wrote:

The only time this makes a difference is if the sizes of bus_addr_t and bus_size_t are different, and I don't have any test hardware where that's the case and I can test TPM. (Only hardware I have where that's the case is ppc Book-E, but that doesn't have a TPM).

Right. Not that I think this is risky, but would you like to do any testing of tpm at all before pushing to main? Otherwise I'll go ahead and push it without testing beyond make.

When committing, please push the core changes alone. Then do the hyper-v part as a separate commit.

The core changes look fine to me. I have no idea about hyper-v part.

I think this is fine. Your comment in the PR that these answer the question what would happen if I tried to open() this path helps avoid any confusion that might exist. But I can't think of wording that is succinct, accurate, and covers all cases so don't have a suggestion to make.

In D45287#1033196, @jhibbits wrote:

The only time this makes a difference is if the sizes of bus_addr_t and bus_size_t are different, and I don't have any test hardware where that's the case and I can test TPM. (Only hardware I have where that's the case is ppc Book-E, but that doesn't have a TPM).

The only time this makes a difference is if the sizes of bus_addr_t and bus_size_t are different, and I don't have any test hardware where that's the case and I can test TPM. (Only hardware I have where that's the case is ppc Book-E, but that doesn't have a TPM).

In D45279#1033131, @markj wrote:

Why would openssl return an error?

In D45283#1033174, @zlei wrote:

@kp I'm going to commit this if no objections.

No objection. Go ahead and commit.

In D45283#1033101, @kp wrote:

diff --git a/tests/sys/net/if_vlan.sh b/tests/sys/net/if_vlan.sh
index 675ed0090e8c..4d5d70410898 100755
--- a/tests/sys/net/if_vlan.sh
+++ b/tests/sys/net/if_vlan.sh
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ basic_body()
        # And change back
        # Test changing the vlan ID
        atf_check -s exit:0 \
-           jexec singsing ifconfig ${vlan1} vlandev ${epair_vlan}b vlan 42
+           jexec singsing ifconfig ${vlan1} vlan 42 vlandev ${epair_vlan}b
        atf_check -s exit:0 -o ignore jexec singsing ping -c 1 10.0.0.1
 }

is probably enough for a test case.

Commit message improvements, based on template.

Seems fine to me with a comment explaining the compile-time tests.

Besides this: how can we figure out how much space (and therefore ports) we can safely provide?

Looks good to me.