search for: uncooperative

I have a server running Red Hat Linux 5.2 with samba 1.9.18 installed (at least that's the rpm package). The server itself is mounting and sharing two SCSI cdrom drives - the kind that are capable of changing up to six cdroms each. The OS mounts the drives correctly. I can see the files. I have shared the drive contents and can map access to them over a Win95 network. I have set the

...share that > between these high-level language implementations. This is an excellent point. You have convinced me. :-) BTW, what garbage collector are you using for your HLVM? You complain about mono's use of the Boehm-Weiser collector on your blog; but you also said that you assumed an uncooperative environment. I'm not a GC expert, so why are the current GC intrinsics insufficient? -DeLesley

Hi all, I would like to implement GC for a language supporting multiple threads. There will be no shared state between threads as communication will be based on message passing. I do not care much about performance. The priority for me is to get things working. I have read LLVM guide on writing GC: http://llvm.org/docs/GarbageCollection.html. Shadow stack approach looks very promising. The

...el language implementations. > > This is an excellent point. You have convinced me. :-) > > BTW, what garbage collector are you using for your HLVM? > > You > complain about mono's use of the Boehm-Weiser collector on your > blog; but you also said that you assumed an uncooperative > environment. I am creating a new (very simple) one by keeping any live local reference variables on a shadow stack. That assumes an uncooperative environment but it is still precise. That will suffice for now. > I'm not a GC expert, so why are the current GC intrinsics insufficient?...

Sorry, I had some e-mail issues in March thanks to an uncooperative ISP and lost some mail. Diego (or someone who knows autotools/pkgconfig better than I do), could you review patches 0001 and 0004? -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Ulrich Klauer <ulrich at chirlu.de> Subject: Opusfile patches Date: Tue, 30 A...

Maybe it's just me, but I get the impression that Grandstream is quite uncooperative. We (and others) have asked them multiple times to make the call- pickup code ("**") configurable but either they don't understand the request or they're unwilling to do anything about it. http://forums.grandstream.com/node/2848 http://forums.grandstream.com/node/709 Unfortunat...

...A Device = /dev/net/tun Hostnames = no PrivateKeyFile = /etc/tinc/apa/rsa_key.priv This setup worked fine before the firewall at B started blocking the port I was using. Now I am trying to get hts to forward port 655 to an http tunnel over port 8888. On B I have in tinc-up: /usr/bin/htc -P proxy.uncooperative.corp.com:8080 -F 655 foo.com:8888 on A /var/log/syslog: Mar 12 13:11:16 A tinc.apa[5985]: tincd 1.0.2 (Nov 8 2003 20:54:15) starting, debug level 0 Mar 12 13:11:16 A tinc.apa[5985]: /dev/net/tun is a Linux tun/tap device (tun mode) Mar 12 13:11:16 A hts[5998]: hts (httptunnel) 3.3 started with ar...

...one to conflict). Other practical reasons might include security by obscurity (like running web consoles or ssh on strange ports), running different NUT data servers (e.g. real drivers on one, and "dummy-ups" or "clone*" relays on the other), or attempts to avoid conflicts with uncooperative software. Can't think of much more quickly :) Hope this helps, Jim Klimov On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 2:31?PM Greg Troxel via Nut-upsuser < nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> wrote: > Jim Klimov via Nut-upsdev <nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net> writes: > > >...

...one to conflict). Other practical reasons might include security by obscurity (like running web consoles or ssh on strange ports), running different NUT data servers (e.g. real drivers on one, and "dummy-ups" or "clone*" relays on the other), or attempts to avoid conflicts with uncooperative software. Can't think of much more quickly :) Hope this helps, Jim Klimov On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 2:31?PM Greg Troxel via Nut-upsuser < nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> wrote: > Jim Klimov via Nut-upsdev <nut-upsdev at alioth-lists.debian.net> writes: > > >...

I'm having a problem installing CentOS 8 from a USB drive. When the installer boots from the USB, it displays the language selection screen. After I select English and continue, the installer freezes. The USB drive flashes a couple times over the next minute or so, the stops. The mouse moves the cursor, but the installer is unresponsive to either selecting QUIT or HELP. I've

> > On 4 Jan 2015, at 16:44, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 03:02:30PM +0000, John Smith wrote: >> "all I need is the ability to get the current variables off the current >> function... > > Finding the functions on the stack is easy. Finding which auto variables > are where is *much* harder. That

...rs of the > programs which produce the bad WAVE files, tell your customers to > switch to compliant programs, As I have stated before on this list, that is a completely unrealistic fantasy. I have yet to find a customer who favorably responds to being told to change their tools. Dumping the uncooperative vendor is generally much easier. Customers don't want excuses, they want solutions. And as pointed out before, sometimes recordings get interrupted. If a recording device loses power it may not be able to write an even number of bytes or update the header size. Sending bug reports to the man...

...ack, I can build something similar to > semispace.c myself so I'm in control of my world, right? i would > set up the shadow stack using IR instructions and could avoid gcroot > by notifying my collector as I see fit... That's true; the shadow stack design is explicitly for uncooperative environments, after all. When you want to eliminate the shadow stack overhead, you will need to (a.) use a conservative GC or (b.) emit stack frame metadata using the LLVM GC support. > Sorry I'm so lost...just trying to figure out what llvm does for me > and what I have to do....

...igned int buflen; > + void *buf; > + int off; > + > + buf = virtqueue_get_buf(rq->vq, &buflen); > + if (unlikely(!buf)) > + goto err_buf; > + > + p = virt_to_head_page(buf); > + off = buf - page_address(p); > + > + /* guard against a misconfigured or uncooperative backend that > + * is sending packet larger than the MTU. > + */ > + if ((page_off + buflen) > PAGE_SIZE) { > + put_page(p); > + goto err_buf; > + } > + > + memcpy(page_address(page) + page_off, > + page_address(p) + off, buflen); > + page_off +=...

...igned int buflen; > + void *buf; > + int off; > + > + buf = virtqueue_get_buf(rq->vq, &buflen); > + if (unlikely(!buf)) > + goto err_buf; > + > + p = virt_to_head_page(buf); > + off = buf - page_address(p); > + > + /* guard against a misconfigured or uncooperative backend that > + * is sending packet larger than the MTU. > + */ > + if ((page_off + buflen) > PAGE_SIZE) { > + put_page(p); > + goto err_buf; > + } > + > + memcpy(page_address(page) + page_off, > + page_address(p) + off, buflen); > + page_off +=...

...lt;> CollectorRegistry::listener *CollectorRegistry::ListenerTail = 0; Afterwards, the most important features work more or less as to be expected: // ShadowStackCollector.cpp CollectorRegistry::Add<ShadowStackGC> Y("shadow-stack", "Shadow-stack collector, for uncooperative code generators"); // llc.cpp static cl::opt<const CollectorRegistry::entry*, false, CollectorRegistry::Parser> GC("gc", cl::desc("Enable garbage collection.")); Collector = GC->instantiate(); // nowhere for (CollectorRegistry::iterator I =...

...n); + page_off += *len; + + while (--*num_buf) { + unsigned int buflen; + void *buf; + int off; + + buf = virtqueue_get_buf(rq->vq, &buflen); + if (unlikely(!buf)) + goto err_buf; + + p = virt_to_head_page(buf); + off = buf - page_address(p); + + /* guard against a misconfigured or uncooperative backend that + * is sending packet larger than the MTU. + */ + if ((page_off + buflen) > PAGE_SIZE) { + put_page(p); + goto err_buf; + } + + memcpy(page_address(page) + page_off, + page_address(p) + off, buflen); + page_off += buflen; + put_page(p); + } + + /* Headroom does...

On Apr 20, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Gordon Henriksen wrote: > The shadow stack walker is in the runtime directory with the semispace > heap example. The runtime directory is built to LLVM IR using llvm- > gcc. So it's skipped unless you configure llvm with llvm-gcc support. doh! That's how I missed the binary. thanks! > Since the semispace heap doesn't actually work (it's

On Wednesday 18 February 2009 23:36:27 DeLesley Hutchins wrote: > > Why do you say that people who compile, e.g., functional languages > > would benefit from type variables in LLVM? > > I like the level the LLVM is at, and would prefer to deal with > > instantiating parametric polymorphism at a higher level. > > I'm surprised you're happy with a

...ng ctx; void *buf; @@ -507,19 +507,22 @@ static struct page *xdp_linearize_page(struct receive_queue *rq, if (unlikely(!ctx)) goto err_buf; + buf = mergeable_ctx_to_buf_address(ctx); + p = virt_to_head_page(buf); + off = buf - page_address(p); + /* guard against a misconfigured or uncooperative backend that * is sending packet larger than the MTU. */ - if ((page_off + buflen) > PAGE_SIZE) + if ((page_off + buflen) > PAGE_SIZE) { + put_page(p); goto err_buf; - - buf = mergeable_ctx_to_buf_address(ctx); - p = virt_to_head_page(buf); - off = buf - page_address(p); +...