search for: unspeak

...e're limited to 2G text, that's just not a lot of room. I'm really going to object when people propose we introduce direct PLT for x86. > And generally speaking, it seems a nice improvement to me, as it gives > the kernel greater addressing flexibility. But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower kernel due to all the ugly? So maybe I'm slow, but please spell out the benefit, because I'm not seeing it.

...e're limited to 2G text, that's just not a lot of room. I'm really going to object when people propose we introduce direct PLT for x86. > And generally speaking, it seems a nice improvement to me, as it gives > the kernel greater addressing flexibility. But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower kernel due to all the ugly? So maybe I'm slow, but please spell out the benefit, because I'm not seeing it.

On 2020-03-04 10:21, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 10:21:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a >> kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower >> kernel due to all the ugly? > > Was that true? I thought the final results were a wash and that earlier > benchmarks weren't accurate for some reason? I can&...

On 2020-03-04 10:21, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 10:21:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a >> kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower >> kernel due to all the ugly? > > Was that true? I thought the final results were a wash and that earlier > benchmarks weren't accurate for some reason? I can&...

Hi- One last question for the week, I promise. I''ve got one IP ProxyArp''d according to the instructions at http://www.shorewall.net/ProxyARP.htm. I''ve setup the shorewall/proxyarp file as follows: #ADDRESS INTERFACE EXTERNAL HAVEROUTE PERSISTENT 208.4.145.73 br0 eth1 no yes #LAST LINE -- ADD YOUR ENTRIES

...oot in LVM. For you, there really is no way around the messy and delicate process of shrinking and relocating a filesystem and the LVM volumes to make space for a larger /boot partition. Frankly, I would hesitate to do that in place on my own system, and I have quite a bit of experience with doing unspeakable things with LVM volumes. You really need to do that resizing in the context of moving everything to another disk. If it's a server that you don't want to take down for the time it takes for that procedure, you can do amazing things with pvmove while your system continues to run, but yo...

...* i32, the ByValSize and ByValAlign if it was a byval pointer: e.g. "{float, float}* byval". Even in the first case there's no indication of where a composite type begins and ends. The latter could be bludgeoned to mean "this is an HFA, put it in VFP regs", but it would be unspeakably ugly. I believe that if the LLVM original Type* pointer is exposed to TargetLowering (perhaps as part of InputArg/OutputArg), then LLVM itself can decide what to do with both Small Structures and HFAs in a sane manner: writing a front-end which adheres to the PCS would be much easier for any s...

First, as I'm here and owe it: huge thanks to Dirk and others who maintain the Debian packaging. Second: I realise these questions are not right on topic here and I will go to the rstudio community support next but I'm failing to find answers elsewhere on the web which makes me suspect they haven't come up there and might well be Debian specific so I suspect that if the expertise

On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 10:21:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a > kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower > kernel due to all the ugly? Was that true? I thought the final results were a wash and that earlier benchmarks weren't accurate for some reason? I can't find the thread n...

...to cover what you need. And no, I don't think I know a single person who'd recommend compiling from source. So I would say just try it and if something comes up come back here, and we will try to help. Lastly, recall that installations of packages should be fully reversible (unless you do unspeakable things). So if for whatever reason the .deb does not install, no harm done. Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org

I've done the unspeakable. I took a working setup of 1.0.5 and upgraded with the latest cvs. with 1.0.5 distinctive ring worked great. with the latest cvs, it doesn't seem to work with my sipura 2000 (the only thing i have to test it with). I can see in console that its sending the info, but its not working? i...

...of numbers, which I plotted and am attaching as a .gif file. I'm used to sudden dropoffs in performance due to things like fragmentation/collisions on a busy net, but this is way to big a change to suit my intuition: I'm used to perfromance going from bad to horrid, not excellent to unspeakable... Comments/suggestions, anyone? > I suppose it must be a 9x problem because NT doesn't do it. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify some people 185 Ellerslie Ave., | and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain Willowdale, Ontario | //www.oreilly.c...

...ere really is no way around the messy and delicate process > of shrinking and relocating a filesystem and the LVM volumes to make > space for a larger /boot partition. Frankly, I would hesitate to do > that in place on my own system, and I have quite a bit of experience > with doing unspeakable things with LVM volumes. You really need to do > that resizing in the context of moving everything to another disk. Agreed.? If / and /home are on xfs you can't shrink anyway.? I'm not sure if ext4 can be shrunk while mounted (I seem to remember that it can't). > > If i...

On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:45 AM H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> wrote: > > On 2020-03-04 10:21, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 10:21:36AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> But at what cost; it does unspeakable ugly to the asm. And didn't a > >> kernel compiled with the extended PIE range produce a measurably slower > >> kernel due to all the ugly? > > > > Was that true? I thought the final results were a wash and that earlier > > benchmarks weren't accurate...

--- Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> wrote: > The only difference in the command lines seems to be that your > xmms-config > explicitly links with -lgthread, while I suppose mine lets the > dynamic linker > pull it in. The only significant difference between the old and new > _LIBADD > lines is that @XMMS_LIBS@ is at the beginning in the new one. Now > that I think

...* i32, the ByValSize and ByValAlign if it was a byval pointer: e.g. "{float, float}* byval". Even in the first case there's no indication of where a composite type begins and ends. The latter could be bludgeoned to mean "this is an HFA, put it in VFP regs", but it would be unspeakably ugly. I believe that if the LLVM original Type* pointer is exposed to TargetLowering (perhaps as part of InputArg/OutputArg), then LLVM itself can decide what to do with both Small Structures and HFAs in a sane manner: writing a front-end which adheres to the PCS would be much easier for any s...

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:36:16AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 10 October 2017 at 09:55, KM <info4km at yahoo.com> wrote: > > First off - let me say I am not an administrator. I need to know if there is an easy way to increase my /boot partition. When I installed CentOS 6 after running 5, it was my oversight not to increase the /boot size. it's too small and I

I''d like to be able to use a CD drive on the Dom0 to be accessible on the DomU systems. I do see some notes involving cdrom drives in the Xen 3.1 Enterprise notes, and in the VT notes, but not for systems without that on-board virtualization feature. And the syntax of the cdrom command options are documented nowhere in 3.0.3. I found completely useless notes at

...And no, I > don't think I know a single person who'd recommend compiling from source. > > So I would say just try it and if something comes up come back here, and we > will try to help. Lastly, recall that installations of packages should be > fully reversible (unless you do unspeakable things). So if for whatever > reason the .deb does not install, no harm done. > > Dirk > > -- > http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org -- Chris Evans <chris at psyctc.org> Skype: chris-psyctc Visiting Professor, University of Sheffield <...

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 04:00:45PM -0800, Thomas Garnier wrote: > Minor changes based on feedback and rebase from v10. > > Splitting the previous serie in two. This part contains assembly code > changes required for PIE but without any direct dependencies with the > rest of the patchset. > > Note: Using objtool to detect non-compliant PIE relocations is not yet > possible