Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:43:27 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: Kristof Provost <kp@FreeBSD.org> Cc: bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net>, grembo@freebsd.org, Free BSD <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: /usr/src/sys/net/if_epair.c:181:6: error: ... Message-ID: <9B9CB488-80F3-4BB3-BA78-97CEFED6CE26@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <22389953-442F-4915-8797-32D1FF577F44@freebsd.org> References: <20220323155947.GA96051@www.zefox.net> <22389953-442F-4915-8797-32D1FF577F44@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2022-Mar-23, at 09:51, Kristof Provost <kp@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On 23 Mar 2022, at 16:59, bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net> wrote: >>=20 >> =EF=BB=BFOn Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:51:17AM +0100, Kristof Provost = wrote: >>>=20 >>> Can you try the attached patch? I???m not going to argue with the MI = code about the atomic_testandclear_int, but instead revert the new = if_epair code (in stable/12 only, of course). >>>=20 >>=20 >> Trying it now. >>=20 >> Patch reported: >> Patching file sys/net/if_epair.c using Plan A... >> Hunk #1 succeeded at 2. >> Hunk #2 failed at 37. >> Hunk #3 succeeded at 61. >> Hunk #4 succeeded at 78. >> Hunk #5 succeeded at 201. >> Hunk #6 succeeded at 517. >> Hunk #7 succeeded at 540. >> Hunk #8 succeeded at 701. >> Hunk #9 succeeded at 791. >> Hunk #10 succeeded at 809. >> Hunk #11 succeeded at 862. >> Hunk #12 succeeded at 876. >> Hunk #13 succeeded at 904. >> Hunk #14 succeeded at 932. >> Hunk #15 succeeded at 947. >> Hunk #16 succeeded at 975. >> Hunk #17 succeeded at 999. >> Hunk #18 succeeded at 1010. >> Hunk #19 succeeded at 1061. >> 1 out of 19 hunks failed--saving rejects to sys/net/if_epair.c.rej >>=20 >> Running make buildkernel -DWITH_META_MODE anyway to see if anything=20= >> else goes wrong. Half an hour in so far and no errors. If it fails=20 >> I'll delete the altered files, run svnlite up again and try over.=20 >>=20 >> Thanks to all for the speedy replies! >=20 > I=E2=80=99m a little confused by that failed hunk. What version are = you patching? The patch should apply cleanly on stable/12.=20 Bob's original report was very specific about the version --but from a svn viewpoint: root@www:/usr/src # svnlite info Path: . Working Copy Root Path: /usr/src URL: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base/stable/12 Relative URL: ^/stable/12 Repository Root: svn://svn.freebsd.org/base Repository UUID: ccf9f872-aa2e-dd11-9fc8-001c23d0bc1f Revision: 371771 Node Kind: directory Schedule: normal Last Changed Author: 0mp Last Changed Rev: 371771 Last Changed Date: 2022-03-22 15:28:40 -0700 (Tue, 22 Mar 2022) In other words (using svnweb to look it up): Revision 371771 - Directory Listing=20 Modified Tue Mar 22 22:28:40 2022 UTC (19 hours, 13 minutes ago) by 0mp nullfs.5: Add an example fstab(5) entry Some other file system manual pages like msdosfs(5) feature similar examples as well. MFC after: 1 week (cherry picked from commit 7d62b5df83000e3c5d14f0dfe8be22a2978534f4) Git Hash: dd999ed9463e3f4f3fe43e843510c8ed371100ed Git Author: 0mp@FreeBSD.org =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9B9CB488-80F3-4BB3-BA78-97CEFED6CE26>