So, let me ask, is the "if_tun.c" file supplied compat with 3.3 and does it
require the kernel sources only, or the whole source tree?
Amir Seyavash Mesry
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LSI Logic Corporation
http://www.lsilogic.com/
Raid Support Test Technician
6145-D Northbelt Parkway
Norcross, GA 30071
On Saturday, Jun 7, 2003, at 14:52 US/Pacific, Amir Seyavash Mesry
wrote:
So, let me ask, is the "if_tun.c" file supplied compat with 3.3 and
does it
require the kernel sources only, or the whole source tree?
I think sending the attachment to the list was an accident. I sent it
to
Tobias when
ne 07, 2003 8:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: altq vs pppoe
On Saturday, Jun 7, 2003, at 14:52 US/Pacific, Amir Seyavash Mesry
wrote:
> So, let me ask, is the "if_tun.c" file supplied compat with 3.3 and
> does it
> require the kernel sources only, or the whole sourc
> Trevor Talbot wrote ...
>
> I did some playing around and discovered something. It seems that
> someone forgot to fully ALTQify tun0. Specifically, select()
> always returns read-ready if there's any data in the internal queue,
> whether ALTQ's discipline is ready to release it or not.
>
>
On Monday, Jun 9, 2003, at 02:14 US/Pacific, Primož Gabrijelčič wrote:
Trevor Talbot wrote ...
As I don't have a PPPoE setup to work with, I did my own testing with
just tun0, and saw the spin effect. Below is a patch for if_tun.c,
which fixed the problem I observed. I'd like to know if it fixe
> > The only weird thing I have noticed is that the download started at
> > 127 KB/s (full DL bandwidth of my ADSL link), but then slowly
> > dropped to the 60 KB/s and stabilized there. During that slowdown,
> > pppoe CPU% raised to the 26% and then stabilised. When download
> > completed, pp
On 10/06/2003, Tobias Wigand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote To [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> same here, works great with a saturated link. i can upload with full speed
> and it doesn´t slow down my downloads at all!
> okay, surfing around while uploading is slower than normal, but thats
> something we have to li
> > Great! Hopefully this will hold for everyone else who's testing it.
>
> same here, works great with a saturated link. i can upload with full speed
> and it doesn´t slow down my downloads at all!
> okay, surfing around while uploading is slower than normal, but thats
> something we have to liv
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 02:38:45PM +0200, Primo? Gabrijel?i? wrote:
> > > Great! Hopefully this will hold for everyone else who's testing it.
> >
> > same here, works great with a saturated link. i can upload with full speed
> > and it doesn´t slow down my downloads at all!
> > okay, surfing arou
> Henning Brauer wrote ...
> > After all positive feedback - is there any chance we can
> > see this submitted to -stable? I think quite some people
> > would applaud to that.
>
> I intend to get that into -current soonish.
>
> it's not really a -stable thing - only bugfixes go to -stable.
Pr
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 03:07:09PM +0200, Primo? Gabrijel?i? wrote:
> > Henning Brauer wrote ...
>
> > > After all positive feedback - is there any chance we can
> > > see this submitted to -stable? I think quite some people
> > > would applaud to that.
> >
> > I intend to get that into -curren
> Henning Brauer wrote ...
>
> > > > After all positive feedback - is there any chance we can
> > > > see this submitted to -stable? I think quite some people
> > > > would applaud to that.
> > >
> > > I intend to get that into -current soonish.
> > >
> > > it's not really a -stable thing - on
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 03:39:36PM +0200, Primo? Gabrijel?i? wrote:
> > Henning Brauer wrote ...
> >
> > > > > After all positive feedback - is there any chance we can
> > > > > see this submitted to -stable? I think quite some people
> > > > > would applaud to that.
> > > >
> > > > I intend to
> Henning Brauer wrote ...
>
> > > why not just run -current ;-)
> >
> > Because I also run few mailing lists and intend to minimize
> > downtime on that computer. IOW, I am also very very
> > conservative :-)
>
> but for updating to latest stable you need one reboot anyway - so why
> not just
On Tuesday, Jun 10, 2003, at 05:07 US/Pacific, Tobias Wigand wrote:
same here, works great with a saturated link. i can upload with full
speed
and it doesn´t slow down my downloads at all!
Great!
okay, surfing around while uploading is slower than normal, but thats
something we have to live with
Hi Trevor,
> As I don't have a PPPoE setup to work with, I did my own testing with
> just
> tun0, and saw the spin effect. Below is a patch for if_tun.c, which
> fixed
> the problem I observed. I'd like to know if it fixes pppoe queueing
> for anyone brave enough to try patches from me.
it w
16 matches
Mail list logo
