search for: _however_

Hello all, It seems that RhostsAuthentication does not work on non-default port no matter what when connecting from OpenSSH (2.1.1, 2.2.0 tried) either with protocol 1 or protocol 2 (shouldn't work either..). _However_ when connecting with SSH.COM Ltd's ssh, RhostsAuthentication works just fine! Checking the port number of ssh client you can see that OpenSSH doesn't assign privileged port for this, but SSH Ltd's ssh does. Connecting to port 22 works with OpenSSH too. Is this a feature? If so, I won...

> What do you mean exactly by "behave differently on the other side of the cast”? Do you have a concrete example? I was hesitant to say only in that it is probably an "abuse of mechanics" and definitely playing with fire, _however_ the target I'm working on has extensive bit operations for a subset of memory, including atomic test-and-set, etc. It's convenient to be able to pass around addresses of these bits, in particular for handling SFRs and interfacing with peripherals that require the use of these instructions....

...lls wait_event > to wait for an interrupt. > > Might be fixable but I think my patch looks like a safer > solution for 4.0/3.19, no? I've no idea what your patch was since I'm not subscribed to any of the lists this discussion is had on. But you can annotate the warning away; _however_ with the annotation needs to be a big comment explaining why its safe to do so. Typically to involved talking about how its actually rare for the call to sleep. So occasional sleeps inside a wait_event() are ok-ish, we'll just get to go around once more. But once you consistently sleep inside...

...lls wait_event > to wait for an interrupt. > > Might be fixable but I think my patch looks like a safer > solution for 4.0/3.19, no? I've no idea what your patch was since I'm not subscribed to any of the lists this discussion is had on. But you can annotate the warning away; _however_ with the annotation needs to be a big comment explaining why its safe to do so. Typically to involved talking about how its actually rare for the call to sleep. So occasional sleeps inside a wait_event() are ok-ish, we'll just get to go around once more. But once you consistently sleep inside...

Sorry for an OT post, but given the recent discussions here re raid, I was wondering if anyone had any info on the ITE 8212 RAID controller (GigaRAID) This is a PATA HW RAID as found on the GigaByte GA-8I915P-PRO motherboard. (I can see an IC on the board labeled GigaRAID. Their manual claims that is has it's own CPU). I am not using it because I have SATA, but I am still curious about

...umber. Reading EDD-4, it explicitly states that simply requesting status is _expected_ to return the last-booted drive number, with no mention of DL anywhere in sight. That means that compliance with EDD-4 requires returning the last-booted drive number regardless of the user's DL query. _However_, eltorito.sys has to deal with _other_ [non-EDD-4] cases, which one reason for why it performs a scan. 3. Since probing 0xFF is buggy on some BIOSes, eltorito.sys prefers to scan upward. 4. Since the general strategy of injecting the El Torito drive number and shifting the conflicting dr...

The following combine(-enabling transformation) makes me uncomfortable:   gep(addrspacecast(gep p0) to p1)   addrspacecast(gep(gep p0)) to p1 It's applied at visitAddrSpaceCast in InstCombineCasts.cpp. Before this, I'd always assumed address spaces were very much "user domain". Datalayout even supports marking a space as "non-integral", to designate that manipulation as

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:50:42AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > > Hi all, > > > > with the recent kernel 3.19, I get a kernel warning when I start my > > KVM guest on s390 with virtio balloon enabled: > > The deeper problem is that virtio_ccw_get_config just silently fails on > OOM. > > Neither

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:50:42AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Thomas Huth <thuth at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > > Hi all, > > > > with the recent kernel 3.19, I get a kernel warning when I start my > > KVM guest on s390 with virtio balloon enabled: > > The deeper problem is that virtio_ccw_get_config just silently fails on > OOM. > > Neither

...ng the list from > tail to head. And how about your idea of propagating the current head down > the linked list? Yeah, so I was half done with that patch when I fell asleep on the flight home. Didn't get around to 'fixing' it. It applies and builds but doesn't actually work. _However_ I'm not sure I actually like it much. The problem I have with it are these wait loops, they can generate the same problem we're trying to avoid. So I was now thinking of hashing the lock pointer; let me go and quickly put something together. --- kernel/locking/qspinlock.c |...

...ng the list from > tail to head. And how about your idea of propagating the current head down > the linked list? Yeah, so I was half done with that patch when I fell asleep on the flight home. Didn't get around to 'fixing' it. It applies and builds but doesn't actually work. _However_ I'm not sure I actually like it much. The problem I have with it are these wait loops, they can generate the same problem we're trying to avoid. So I was now thinking of hashing the lock pointer; let me go and quickly put something together. --- kernel/locking/qspinlock.c |...

i'm running samba on solaris x86 only for accessing NT shares. samba is not running as a domain master or anything. the problem is that when i try to upload 18mb file to NT share, smbclient crashes. $ smbclient //<box 1>/<share A> added interface ip=x.x.1.30 bcast=x.x.255.255 nmask=255.255.0.0 Domain=[ACCORD] OS=[Windows NT 4.0] Server=[NT LAN Manager 4.0] smb: \> put

On 7/16/19 6:04 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > A Closure is a list of (usually one, but can be more) closures. In C > there is also a singe ‘void *user_data’ parameter which is passed by > the caller into the function and through as the first parameter of > each callback invocation. > > By grouping the previously separate Opaque and Callback* parameters > together we can

On 03/16/2015 09:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Implement simple paravirt support for the qspinlock. > > Provide a separate (second) version of the spin_lock_slowpath for > paravirt along with a special unlock path. > > The second slowpath is generated by adding a few pv hooks to the > normal slowpath, but where those will compile away for the native > case, they expand

On 03/16/2015 09:16 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Implement simple paravirt support for the qspinlock. > > Provide a separate (second) version of the spin_lock_slowpath for > paravirt along with a special unlock path. > > The second slowpath is generated by adding a few pv hooks to the > normal slowpath, but where those will compile away for the native > case, they expand

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, this is a new attempt to improve the output of the command "btrfs fi df". The previous attempt received a good reception. However there was no a general consensus about the wording. Moreover I still didn''t understand how btrfs was using the disks. A my first attempt was to develop a new command which shows how the disks