Displaying 20 results from an estimated 30000 matches similar to: "Disk I/O with OpenSSH"
2011 Jun 14
0
[LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?
On Jun 14, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Chris, I've CC'd Eric Botcazou in the hope that he will clear up just what
> the Ada front-end needs from the rest of the compiler as far as asynchronous
> exceptions are concerned.
>
>>> gcc Ada turns signals into exceptions. As far as I know it does this
>>> completely asynchronously, and the fact
2011 Jun 13
0
[LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?
On Jun 13, 2011, at 2:23 PM, Andrew Trick wrote:
>> There is really no alternative to putting EH edges on basic blocks if you're going to support preemptive asynchronous exceptions — some random multiply that gets hoisted out of a loop has to change exception handlers just in case that's where the PC lands during a signal. There isn't much point in complaining that doing so
2011 Jun 14
3
[LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?
Hi Chris, I've CC'd Eric Botcazou in the hope that he will clear up just what
the Ada front-end needs from the rest of the compiler as far as asynchronous
exceptions are concerned.
>> gcc Ada turns signals into exceptions. As far as I know it does this
>> completely asynchronously, and the fact that LLVM doesn't support this
>> is rather bad as far as Ada is
2025 Mar 07
4
Support for transferring sparse files via scp/sftp correctly?
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025, Cedric Blancher wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 at 21:22, Chris Rapier <rapier at psc.edu> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 3/4/25 05:34, Philipp Marek via openssh-unix-dev wrote:
> > >> Does OpenSSH scp/sftp mode transfer sparse files correctly, i.e. are
> > >> holes skipped and not transferred as chunks of 0 bytes? [1]
> >
2010 Nov 19
3
File Offsets for SCP (patch)
I don't know if anyone would be interested in this but I'm including a
patch to allow for offsets when transferring files with SCP.
It's pretty simple and assumes the user knows what they are doing (for
example, if transferring with a wild card the offset would apply to all
files). -A is the number of bytes offset from the beginning of the
files. -Z is the number of bytes inset
2011 Jun 14
2
[LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?
Hi John,
On 13/06/11 23:27, John McCall wrote:
> On Jun 13, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Andrew Trick wrote:
>> Although I believe asynchronous signals are also best handled by the runtime. They can be converted into cooperative exceptions. I have to say I can't see the value in resuming from an interrupt at literally any instruction address.
>
> For what it's worth, SEH (which
2011 Jun 13
8
[LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?
On Jun 13, 2011, at 12:29 AM, John McCall wrote:
>
> On Jun 12, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Bill Wendling wrote:
>
>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 4:40 PM, John McCall wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Cameron Zwarich wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 12, 2011, at 1:25 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Sohail,
>>>>>
2018 Jan 19
2
Exception handling support for a target
> From: Tim Northover via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Emitting directives in the epilogue is hard because the directives
> apply to all instructions after in program-counter order. So if you
> have an epilogue in the middle of a function and emit CFI directives
> saying the registers are back where they were then the unwinder will
> think that applies to the
2011 Jun 14
0
[LLVMdev] Is LLVM expressive enough to represent asynchronous exceptions?
On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:11 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> gcc Ada turns signals into exceptions. As far as I know it does this
> completely asynchronously, and the fact that LLVM doesn't support this
> is rather bad as far as Ada is concerned. That said, the Ada front-end
You're saying that it turns asynch signals like SIGHUP (which can occur on any machine instruction) into signals?
2018 Jan 19
0
Exception handling support for a target
On 19 Jan 2018, at 14:48, John Reagan via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> OpenVMS' EH model is for full asynchronous prologue/epilogue EH. We do more
> than just program-level EH, but have to deal with OS events (timers going off,
> asynch I/O completion, mailboxes filled with data, etc.) which could result in
> an unwind occurring.
>
>
2024 Nov 07
1
ssh compat information
On 11/6/24 8:07 PM, Damien Miller wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2024, Chris Rapier wrote:
>
>> I think I know the answer to this (which would be that you can't) but is there
>> any not entirely insane way to get the ssh->compat information back to either
>> scp or sftp?
>
> There's no way at present.
That's what I thought.
>> I'm doing some
2024 Nov 07
1
ssh compat information
On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 at 07:55, Chris Rapier <rapier at psc.edu> wrote:
>[...]I had been using
> Blake2b512 for the hashing algorithm but I want to put in a path to use
> xxhash instead. Maintaining backward compatibility means I need to know
> something about the remote.
In the case of sftp at least, that sounds like a function of the
sftp-server not sshd, in which case could you
2018 Jan 19
1
Exception handling support for a target
I think it's valuable to have precise / asynchronous unwind information
without adding support for non-call exceptions. Profilers and debuggers
need to be able to unwind the stack from arbitrary instruction boundaries,
but they don't need to run exception handlers. We can still declare that
outside the model. Speaking of which, barring bugs, we do support precise
unwind info on Win64.
2024 Nov 07
1
ssh compat information
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024 at 03:16, Darren Tucker <dtucker at dtucker.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 at 07:55, Chris Rapier <rapier at psc.edu> wrote:
> >[...]I had been using
> > Blake2b512 for the hashing algorithm but I want to put in a path to use
> > xxhash instead. Maintaining backward compatibility means I need to know
> > something about the remote.
2005 Sep 08
1
HPN Patch for OpenSSH 4.2p1 Available
Howdy,
As a note, we now have HPN patch for OpenSSH 4.2 at
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
Its still part of the last set of patches (HPN11) so there aren't any
additional changes in the code. It patches, configures, compiles, and
passes make tests without a problem. I've not done extensive testing for
this version of openssh but I don't foresee any problems.
I
2024 Nov 07
1
ssh compat information
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024, Chris Rapier wrote:
> I think I know the answer to this (which would be that you can't) but is there
> any not entirely insane way to get the ssh->compat information back to either
> scp or sftp?
There's no way at present.
> I'm doing some extensions on scp (and eventually sftp) and having remote
> version or capability information would be
2007 Apr 17
1
SCP v. SFTP
I was comparing some traces from SCP and SFTP when transferring the same
file 200MB file between the same host pairs. Even when I put SFTP in
batch mode I noticed that I saw 403208 bytes from the receiver in
comparison to 3368 bytes with SCP. I've attached the relevant output
from tcptrace below (the b->a column is the return side of the trace).
Mostly I'm just curious as to what
2024 Nov 06
1
ssh compat information
I think I know the answer to this (which would be that you can't) but is
there any not entirely insane way to get the ssh->compat information
back to either scp or sftp?
I'm doing some extensions on scp (and eventually sftp) and having remote
version or capability information would be helpful.
Chris
2005 Jul 28
1
People using the HPN patch...
If anyone is using the HPN patch on a high performance link I was
wondering if you could take a moment to answer a quick question
Are you seeing vastly different performance between scp throughput and
sftp throughput? On my test network (pittsburgh to chicago) I'm getting
26MB/s with scp (arcfour) and only 6.4MB/s with sftp (arcfour). We just
started looking into this but it woudl be nice
2019 Jun 06
1
[libnbd PATCH] tls: Check for pending bytes in gnutls buffers
Checking for poll(POLLIN) only wakes us up when the server sends more
bytes over the wire. But the way gnutls is implemented, it reads as
many non-blocking bytes as possible from the wire before then parsing
where the encoded message boundaries lie within those bytes. As a
result, we may already have the server's next reply in memory without
needing to block on the server sending yet more