2018/freebsd-hackers/20180107.freebsd-hackers
Messages: 81, sorted by subject
|
Last update: Mon Feb 13 14:18:04 UTC 2023
|
|
home | up | archive sorted by: subject | author | date | reverse date
1. Jan 5 Warner Losh Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 2. Jan 5 Eric McCorkle Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 3. Jan 5 Warner Losh Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 4. Jan 5 Eric McCorkle Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 5. Jan 5 Warner Losh Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 6. Jan 5 Eric McCorkle Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 7. Jan 5 Warner Losh Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 8. Jan 5 Eric McCorkle Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 9. Jan 6 Eric McCorkle Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 10. Jan 6 Nathan Dautenhahn Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 11. Jan 6 Gary Jennejohn Re: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 12. Jan 6 Johannes Lundberg callout_reset_on() with wait? 13. Jan 6 Konstantin Belousov Re: callout_reset_on() with wait? 14. Jan 4 Eitan Adler Fwd: [Differential] [Request, 113 lines] D13757: morse: implement support for deco 15. Jan 5 Yuri Re: Fwd: [Differential] [Request, 113 lines] D13757: morse: implement support for 16. Jan 5 Eric McCorkle Fwd: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 17. Jan 6 Eric McCorkle Re: Fwd: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 18. Jan 6 Warner Losh Re: Fwd: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 19. Jan 6 Wojciech Puchar Re: Fwd: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 20. Jan 6 Wojciech Puchar Re: Fwd: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure
21. Jan 6 Wojciech Puchar Re: Fwd: A more general possible meltdown/spectre countermeasure 22. Dec 31 Eitan Adler Heads Up: bug status changed for untouched bugs since 2014 23. Dec 31 Eitan Adler Re: Heads Up: bug status changed for untouched bugs since 2014 24. Jan 5 Jules Gilbert Re: Intel hardware bug 25. Jan 5 =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3 Re: Intel hardware bug 26. Jan 5 Andrew Duane RE: Intel hardware bug 27. Jan 5 Eric McCorkle Re: Intel hardware bug 28. Jan 5 =?UTF-8?B?QyBCZXJnc3Ryw7Zt Re: Intel hardware bug 29. Jan 5 Jules Gilbert Re: Intel hardware bug 30. Jan 5 Chris H Re: Intel hardware bug 31. Jan 5 Cy Schubert RE: Intel hardware bug 32. Jan 5 Freddie Cash Re: Intel hardware bug 33. Jan 5 Jan Knepper Re: Intel hardware bug 34. Jan 5 K. Macy Re: Intel hardware bug 35. Jan 5 K. Macy Re: Intel hardware bug 36. Jan 5 Cy Schubert RE: Intel hardware bug 37. Jan 5 Adam Vande More Re: Intel hardware bug 38. Jan 6 John-Mark Gurney Re: Intel hardware bug 39. Jan 6 Freddie Cash Re: Intel hardware bug 40. Dec 30 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base?
41. Dec 30 Rodney W. Grimes Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 42. Dec 31 Mark Millard Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 43. Jan 1 Rodney W. Grimes Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 44. Jan 1 Mark Millard Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 45. Jan 1 Mark Millard Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 46. Jan 1 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 47. Jan 1 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 48. Jan 1 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 49. Jan 1 Mark Millard Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 50. Jan 1 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 51. Jan 1 Larry McVoy Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 52. Jan 1 Mark Millard Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 53. Jan 1 Larry McVoy Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 54. Jan 1 Rodney W. Grimes Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 55. Jan 1 Ian Lepore Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 56. Jan 1 Larry McVoy Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 57. Jan 1 Warner Losh Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 58. Jan 1 Rodney W. Grimes Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 59. Jan 1 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 60. Jan 1 hiren panchasara Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base?
61. Jan 1 Warner Losh Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 62. Jan 1 Rodney W. Grimes Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 63. Jan 1 Warner Losh Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 64. Jan 1 Rodney W. Grimes Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 65. Jan 5 Brooks Davis Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 66. Jan 5 Eugene Grosbein Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 67. Jan 5 Eric van Gyzen Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 68. Jan 5 Poul-Henning Kamp Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 69. Jan 5 Eugene Grosbein Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 70. Jan 5 Conrad Meyer Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 71. Jan 6 Ian Lepore Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 72. Jan 6 Brooks Davis Re: Is it considered to be ok to not check the return code of close(2) in base? 73. Jan 4 Kristof Provost RFC: mallocarray() 74. Jan 2 Mark Millard rpi2 head -r327485 (e.g.): rpi2 leaves one "CPU n" always idle for some boots 75. Jan 2 Mark Millard Re: rpi2 head -r327485 (e.g.): rpi2 leaves one "CPU n" always idle for some boots 76. Jan 2 Allan Jude Re: rpi2 head -r327485 (e.g.): rpi2 leaves one "CPU n" always idle for some boots 77. Jan 2 Mark Millard Re: rpi2 head -r327485 (e.g.): rpi2 leaves one "CPU n" always idle for some boots 78. Jan 2 Mark Millard Re: rpi2 head -r327485 (e.g.): rpi2 leaves one "CPU n" always idle for some boots 79. Jan 4 Benjamin Kaduk Second Call for 2017Q4 quarterly status reports 80. Jan 2 Zaphod Beeblebrox Re: We do serial differently.
81. Jan 4 Kyle Evans Re: We do serial differently.
home | up | archive sorted by: subject | author | date | reverse date