From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 25 11:06:56 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57F11065696 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:06:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 990F18FC16 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:06:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0PB6uJO038699 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:06:56 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o0PB6tMJ038697 for freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:06:55 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:06:55 GMT Message-Id: <201001251106.o0PB6tMJ038697@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:06:56 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o kern/120749 arch [request] Suggest upping the default kern.ps_arg_cache 1 problem total. From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 26 17:39:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D061065672 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:39:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from etnapierala@googlemail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.159]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C4E88FC1E for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:39:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 19so754803fgg.13 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:39:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:from:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id:to:mime-version :x-mailer; bh=AW05wRJkyuFgOPgO3ZzxH+HTKnp8F1PIQfZGoD5fikk=; b=vM0Acpi5kVmjtvnLMb30NT3/wtQkzNsYt9TQQk/EO7P6HfCAnublosalI0uqm1Oq+4 PZ7X3Af6/dqOAJkIT8quS1Au9Kc3vfaR4lckbIW6JDQnt+Z7F4OBzkckl+HQQg0UWE3B SAcDcyfr537lAuD4To3s+GSfUmUgzUGi3DDyk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date :message-id:to:mime-version:x-mailer; b=F6BSKVqyyxerhR5MSFHES2CD/05sTjxBgqgqMrLdVeeAMaIG22KOL1M2n5WpfAAVzV XF+cmig4BIuga4g4reNrxlriZYBo9Yi4WE1Rrhm2OsVuNCSFpA6tHTqhNgjefDSVFVuT 3f5rPq88IC1+ZddjO9d8cX0GcxyrM0LNkmKmI= Received: by 10.87.38.5 with SMTP id q5mr4216954fgj.45.1264525794955; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:09:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? (45.81.datacomsa.pl [195.34.81.45]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l19sm8756695fgb.15.2010.01.26.09.09.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:09:53 -0800 (PST) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Edward_Napiera=C5=82a?= From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=B3a?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:09:51 +0100 Message-Id: <1B738C12-E39C-4B07-9599-07A074815FC7@FreeBSD.org> To: "arch@" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) Subject: vfsops:vfs_cmount X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:39:32 -0000 Right now, most filesystems (probably every one except ZFS) implement both xxx_mount() and xxx_cmount(). It looks like the former is used to implement nmount(2), while the latter is used for mount(2). Since mount(8) already uses nmount(2), what about removing vfsops:vfs_cmount implementations in filesystems? -- If you cut off my head, what would I say? Me and my head, or me and my body? From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 27 12:30:35 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34380106568D for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:30:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rbgarga@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f218.google.com (mail-ew0-f218.google.com [209.85.219.218]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE3E38FC1E for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy10 with SMTP id 10so1190766ewy.3 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:30:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=W2QuEwxkeN9bn+IIhMDOYI7mf9WWMbBpIs32gk/sGNs=; b=clim6phA7w75p4ccMLQb/EkzXC+X4OY7x+iGt33I0RvUItEIcFw913PshGjlqlQmJB rjZwFTPZT2q2bm8q1MqvWsEr/eoP36lRRjxriuGsyXpVctkXxYvw/UQhNLcfRhxdiU8S 5IoO1/Nx8K+03eAo6P3vyygqbuWzWWFDn+rgU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; b=pP7EzLG4TU6gTvP/bP22UrQXy39CxBUHhlcZyMzHjj2y5gA0jbfmwMUhnw32i08Lj4 AzxMS9vZWycBhmTFq0FzotwnxQvRZ2hP27n7TReTm/1x/WUy78XvmZha4e1IYrzJ6L/d dg7wQNNuYB4ON5aRYGUTM0IK84U0l4jugP5uc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.171.207 with SMTP id r57mr813939wel.146.1264593962063; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:06:02 -0800 (PST) From: Renato Botelho Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:05:42 -0200 Message-ID: <747dc8f31001270405l4fc1e79ctb892ad92db96204d@mail.gmail.com> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: problems building new clamav because of march i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:30:35 -0000 I'm having some problem trying to update clamav-devel port to a new snapshot. Since it's using llvm now, i didn't build on i386 arch, after some changes, it builds now but without atomic build. The point is, the clamav team say since our march is i386-* the binaries are built for old i386 arch, is it correct? Here is the thread under clamav-devel maillist, could someone take a look and gimme some help to understand and maybe fix the problem? http://lurker.clamav.net/message/20091222.104012.8c8e6750.en.html -- Renato Botelho From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 27 12:53:36 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638091065672 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:53:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rdivacky@vlk.vlakno.cz) Received: from vlakno.cz (77-93-215-190.static.masterinter.net [77.93.215.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DBC58FC14 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:53:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 653C89CB0D1; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:34:25 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at vlakno.cz Received: from vlakno.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lev.vlakno.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XLo-hnzQrmSX; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:34:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from vlk.vlakno.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vlakno.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DCE09CB0FE; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:34:23 +0100 (CET) Received: (from rdivacky@localhost) by vlk.vlakno.cz (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o0RCYMTO030475; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:34:22 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from rdivacky) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:34:22 +0100 From: Roman Divacky To: Renato Botelho Message-ID: <20100127123422.GA30191@freebsd.org> References: <747dc8f31001270405l4fc1e79ctb892ad92db96204d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <747dc8f31001270405l4fc1e79ctb892ad92db96204d@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problems building new clamav because of march i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:53:36 -0000 On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:05:42AM -0200, Renato Botelho wrote: > I'm having some problem trying to update clamav-devel port to > a new snapshot. > > Since it's using llvm now, i didn't build on i386 arch, after some > changes, it builds now but without atomic build. > > The point is, the clamav team say since our march is i386-* the > binaries are built for old i386 arch, is it correct? > > Here is the thread under clamav-devel maillist, could someone > take a look and gimme some help to understand and maybe fix > the problem? I've already talked to Edwin Torok about this... the problem is that llvm needs atomic builtins which only i486 provides. The change of default target from i386 to i486 has been made on HEAD and I believe the commit was already MFCed to (at least) 8.x. I believe the port could be fixed by something like CFLAGS+=-march=i486 roman From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 27 13:01:50 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9FC41065676 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:01:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rbgarga@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f227.google.com (mail-fx0-f227.google.com [209.85.220.227]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 504108FC1C for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:01:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm27 with SMTP id 27so508663fxm.3 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 05:01:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=RTIUWZ50in/0jBUk7y9XIkbnU7/KRyzHjgfAQnM4w3c=; b=L61Fl88+pZkKkPjWP4vVm33ZPFebMoT9aeWxt32z7GVY+S4ySKVpN0FlCWJtMx6NPr JzU0AfiWAg5UfKukGCVibEAYfUmC4IrgzzqvijnguykGf6JWiLgH6K2vQG+CEPdX15x0 gcswYzYxzz3Gjll83MZsimHHmbfi1JNY3R7J8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=EtC2CFGX+rPxb1tL2FZ6LeoBKsIC623/zdzTRfN47IOQdeB8STFltDgEBWrlZlOnSF fKrYTnkhqNTRTPdYVcMMXigV1IqPpEkhlcZWQ3vxIZEkxGv5PEBoArBSbr2A0/+9Iz/r KUPB2NpFcftH78595kcS7H8X7Ju3v/X5oCP+I= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.86.195 with SMTP id w45mr2221289wee.82.1264596863118; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 04:54:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100127123422.GA30191@freebsd.org> References: <747dc8f31001270405l4fc1e79ctb892ad92db96204d@mail.gmail.com> <20100127123422.GA30191@freebsd.org> From: Renato Botelho Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:54:03 -0200 Message-ID: <747dc8f31001270454w5a0e1a53g257e4d67394ffed4@mail.gmail.com> To: Roman Divacky Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problems building new clamav because of march i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:01:50 -0000 On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Roman Divacky wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:05:42AM -0200, Renato Botelho wrote: >> I'm having some problem trying to update clamav-devel port to >> a new snapshot. >> >> Since it's using llvm now, i didn't build on i386 arch, after some >> changes, it builds now but without atomic build. >> >> The point is, the clamav team say since our march is i386-* the >> binaries are built for old i386 arch, is it correct? >> >> Here is the thread under clamav-devel maillist, could someone >> take a look and gimme some help to understand and maybe fix >> the problem? > > I've already talked to Edwin Torok about this... the problem is that > llvm needs atomic builtins which only i486 provides. The change > of default target from i386 to i486 has been made on HEAD and I believe > the commit was already MFCed to (at least) 8.x. > > I believe the port could be fixed by something like CFLAGS+=-march=i486 Thanks Roman, I'll make necessary tests. -- Renato Botelho From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 27 14:46:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6E81065694; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:46:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F4128FC15; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:46:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 276F146B3B; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:46:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (smtp.hudson-trading.com [209.249.190.9]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 557728A025; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:46:31 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:04:20 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (FreeBSD/7.2-CBSD-20100120; KDE/4.3.1; amd64; ; ) References: <747dc8f31001270405l4fc1e79ctb892ad92db96204d@mail.gmail.com> <20100127123422.GA30191@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20100127123422.GA30191@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001270804.20670.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Wed, 27 Jan 2010 09:46:31 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.1 at bigwig.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on bigwig.baldwin.cx Cc: Renato Botelho , Roman Divacky Subject: Re: problems building new clamav because of march i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:46:32 -0000 On Wednesday 27 January 2010 7:34:22 am Roman Divacky wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:05:42AM -0200, Renato Botelho wrote: > > I'm having some problem trying to update clamav-devel port to > > a new snapshot. > > > > Since it's using llvm now, i didn't build on i386 arch, after some > > changes, it builds now but without atomic build. > > > > The point is, the clamav team say since our march is i386-* the > > binaries are built for old i386 arch, is it correct? > > > > Here is the thread under clamav-devel maillist, could someone > > take a look and gimme some help to understand and maybe fix > > the problem? > > I've already talked to Edwin Torok about this... the problem is that > llvm needs atomic builtins which only i486 provides. The change > of default target from i386 to i486 has been made on HEAD and I believe > the commit was already MFCed to (at least) 8.x. > > I believe the port could be fixed by something like CFLAGS+=-march=i486 It was merged to 7 as well. It seems 6.x should use a newer gcc version for the llvm support anyway. You should probably only add -march=i486 to CFLAGS if it isn't already present. -- John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 27 14:51:20 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CAC5106566C; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:51:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rbgarga@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f218.google.com (mail-ew0-f218.google.com [209.85.219.218]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8295A8FC14; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:51:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy10 with SMTP id 10so1339602ewy.3 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:51:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=l7uqvn0TXJ3CEdxCkhMqs3pl8B+uL8hsytD0Lesq8mA=; b=fjrlTPem+y++y2B4bpg/4BtdLjrVa4dOwdCi9FDSUKAnbpxWs3m/cMe3GnyCz8EibH vf0KDgihH3vJ7tLMGobtAlRvv4kS66Y+S6zlx5fgis/s2j9xBMGeMWvpTmzikwQ+YHOV XyxLoBeNlLd6dIjA9rM7ySYsvLh1u2rrZ0iaQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Aubg1bEA/2Y8GPMXdRLFnqzNQkZZ3OJ+wpYu2r1Jg6BCGLq2Z8N//S/q+gk6Yj3Nix g6MuAWROyFsTuUa/754cCNBoFYjAQIwpEoQIdfi/0nnUfcqbiImcxsYgKuHfJ7YCFylM oYE/aNcW9W71jtNt1HgnzdJTYd5cTEx51Mt2c= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.171.207 with SMTP id r57mr926227wel.146.1264603878307; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:51:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201001270804.20670.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <747dc8f31001270405l4fc1e79ctb892ad92db96204d@mail.gmail.com> <20100127123422.GA30191@freebsd.org> <201001270804.20670.jhb@freebsd.org> From: Renato Botelho Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:50:58 -0200 Message-ID: <747dc8f31001270650k58653ffena3da8f6c19330144@mail.gmail.com> To: John Baldwin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Roman Divacky , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problems building new clamav because of march i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:51:20 -0000 On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:04 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 27 January 2010 7:34:22 am Roman Divacky wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:05:42AM -0200, Renato Botelho wrote: >> > I'm having some problem trying to update clamav-devel port to >> > a new snapshot. >> > >> > Since it's using llvm now, i didn't build on i386 arch, after some >> > changes, it builds now but without atomic build. >> > >> > The point is, the clamav team say since our march is i386-* the >> > binaries are built for old i386 arch, is it correct? >> > >> > Here is the thread under clamav-devel maillist, could someone >> > take a look and gimme some help to understand and maybe fix >> > the problem? >> >> I've already talked to Edwin Torok about this... the problem is that >> llvm needs atomic builtins which only i486 provides. The change >> of default target from i386 to i486 has been made on HEAD and I believe >> the commit was already MFCed to (at least) 8.x. >> >> I believe the port could be fixed by something like CFLAGS+=3D-march=3Di= 486 > > It was merged to 7 as well. =A0It seems 6.x should use a newer gcc versio= n > for the llvm support anyway. =A0You should probably only add -march=3Di48= 6 to > CFLAGS if it isn't already present. I added it and it built fine. For 6.x i added a USE_GCC=3D4.2+ which fixed = the problem too. Thank you and rdivacky --=20 Renato Botelho From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 28 11:03:31 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94B84106568D for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:03:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from giovanni.trematerra@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f226.google.com (mail-fx0-f226.google.com [209.85.220.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E6658FC0A for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm26 with SMTP id 26so249630fxm.13 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:03:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=kebx9f5Br9FBQTIJKArEFYNZ6e12nidi6/aS4gGpjaQ=; b=ELd4Pk7660fx78J5b1rI99JgHHu8r7gtJSVBuzKYW7Ja3mOVYvfj6odosLJqM+qHIW WE6GE73+MVyzsDxMr7svvRipvsY2Tol5MoyoDnAbklNeBgkMiGUzydY2N1kzm8BwO66k Bt1xjHjZJW1oEMcPkz+g54AD080vpn9eWwJsw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=PHe+gQkTGNQw6rtPPwtRCsdo3O0UjjGZ7FQDvGGNomK1ADvdSijbilsK01C4TQ7dei xU5j/D2ApnwkhSSBaqdtGVIM9Z2TjMkymkJjNt5Bri3oYI5Ijiyg6Gge1HgGiNsCaGfc E+t+SXNpHxKxWBSqLlz/msHD/yWSB0y82L/w4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.144.207 with SMTP id a15mr1267957fav.70.1264675130734; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 02:38:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:38:50 +0100 Message-ID: <4e6cba831001280238x6a86e9f8vf5b7858b4bb82178@mail.gmail.com> From: Giovanni Trematerra To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Attilio Rao Subject: kthread interface X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:03:31 -0000 Hi all, There is a race in kthread_exit when all the threads of a kernel process exit at same time. I came up with a quick and dirty patch that resolve the issue at least in my test case. http://www.trematerra.net/patches/kthread_exit.diff Nonetheless I see space for improvement into kthread interface. At present, with kproc_kthread_add you could have a kernel process without a main thread and that seems to me only a way to logical grouping threads and pretty useless. I propose to remove kproc_kthread_add and don't let kthread_exit call kproc_exit on the last exiting thread but demand user to handle process termination. If you need kernel threads but no reason to have a kernel process with a main thread that acts as a coordinator you can attach them to proc0 by kthread_add passing NULL for (struct proc *) argument. I attached a patch to better show my proposal. http://www.trematerra.net/patches/kproc_kthread_add.diff Note: the two patches are mutually exclusive Thanks for your attention. -- Gianni