Re: netstat -i[d] violates PoLS

2014-03-31 Thread Attilio Rao
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Alan Somers asom...@freebsd.org wrote: netstat -i prints dropped output packets iff you also use -d. Starting with r199803 on 2009-11-25, netstat -i prints dropped input packets regardless of the -d flags. That is a PoLS violation, IMHO. I think that the -d

Re: fast bcopy...

2012-05-03 Thread Attilio Rao
2012/5/3, Steven Atreju snatr...@googlemail.com: K. Macy wrote [2012-05-03 02:58+0200]: It's highly chipset and processor dependent what works best. Yes, of course. Though i was kinda, even shocked, once i've seen this first: http://marc.info/?l=dragonfly-commitsm=132241713812022w=2 So

[PATCH] Add MD5 signature checking for incoming packets

2011-04-19 Thread Attilio Rao
The patch at: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/Sandvine/STABLE_8/tcp_signature/tcp_signature.diff - Enable the md5 signature checking for incoming packets, when both enabled in the kernel and desired by the socket - Spit out an error when the option TCP_SIGNATURE is enabled and IPSEC option is not

Re: CFT/CFR, possible fix for ifconfig scan hang

2010-12-27 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/12/27 Bernhard Schmidt bschm...@freebsd.org: Hi, I recently received some complains about the infamous 'ifconfig scan hang' issue again. Finally looking into that I noticed a bunch of inconsistences, the most obvious one is that ifconfig(8) is talking about doing a background scan by

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-14 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/10/14 Robert N. M. Watson rwat...@freebsd.org: On 13 Oct 2010, at 18:46, Ryan Stone wrote: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Robert Watson rwat...@freebsd.org wrote: +               /* +                * get and fill a header mbuf, then chain data as an extended +                * mbuf.

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-14 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/10/14 Robert N. M. Watson rwat...@freebsd.org: On 14 Oct 2010, at 15:10, Attilio Rao wrote: My concern is less about occasional lost dumps that destabilising the dumping process: calls into the memory allocator can currently trigger a lot of interesting behaviours, such as further

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-13 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/10/9 Robert Watson rwat...@freebsd.org: On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Attilio Rao wrote: GENERAL FRAMEWORK ARCHITECTURE Netdump is composed, right now, by an userland server and a kernel client. The former is run on the target machine (where the dump will phisically happen) and it is responsible

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-10-08 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/9/28 Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org: In the last weeks I worked for porting the netdump infrastructure to FreeBSD-CURRENT on the behalf of Sandvine Incorporated. Netdump is a framework that aims for handling kernel coredumps over the TCP/IP suite in order to dump to a separate machine

Re: [PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-09-29 Thread Attilio Rao
2010/9/29 Sergey Kandaurov pluk...@gmail.com: [just don't know what namely need to test, so] All made according to your instructions. The only way I could trigger netdump was to run its ddb command by hand. Neither debug.kdb.enter nor debug.kdb.panic don't do it. You probabilly need to use

[PATCH] Netdump for review and testing -- preliminary version

2010-09-28 Thread Attilio Rao
In the last weeks I worked for porting the netdump infrastructure to FreeBSD-CURRENT on the behalf of Sandvine Incorporated. Netdump is a framework that aims for handling kernel coredumps over the TCP/IP suite in order to dump to a separate machine than the running one. That may be used on an

[PATCH] libtacplus bugfix

2009-11-16 Thread Attilio Rao
[Please CC me as I'm not subscribed to -...@] In tac_get_av_value() empty attributes should be handled like 0-lenght strings while in the current code they are handled as unset attributes. This patch implements the (probabilly) desired semantic:

[PATCH] Fix a socket leak in libfetch

2009-11-16 Thread Attilio Rao
[Please CC me as I'm not subscribed to -...@] In ftp_request(), after a successfully established connection, subsequent errors can bring to a socket leak. This patch should fix that: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/Sandvine/STABLE_8/libfetch/ftp.diff This patch has been contributed back by

[PATCH] Add idrop report to netstat

2009-11-16 Thread Attilio Rao
[Please CC me as I'm not subscribed to -...@] This patch allows to show the informations about packets droped on input for interfaces on netstat: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/Sandvine/STABLE_8/idrops/idrops.diff This patch as been contributed back from Sandvine Incorporated. Comments, reviews

Re: [PATCH] Add idrop report to netstat

2009-11-16 Thread Attilio Rao
2009/11/16 Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com: On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 04:15:09PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: [Please CC me as I'm not subscribed to -...@] This patch allows to show the informations about packets droped on input for interfaces on netstat: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/Sandvine

Re: [PATCH] Add idrop report to netstat

2009-11-16 Thread Attilio Rao
2009/11/17 Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com: On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:04:20PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: 2009/11/16 Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com: On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 04:15:09PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: [Please CC me as I'm not subscribed to -...@] This patch allows to show

Re: Interrupts + Polling mode (similar to Linux's NAPI)

2009-04-23 Thread Attilio Rao
2009/4/23 Ed Maste ema...@freebsd.org: On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:05:00AM +, Andrew Brampton wrote: 2009/3/27 Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it: The load of polling is pretty low (within 1% or so) even with polling. The advantage of having interrupts is faster response to incoming

Re: New wpi driver

2006-11-10 Thread Attilio Rao
2006/11/10, Max Laier [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 10 November 2006 10:37, Massimo Lusetti wrote: On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 22:39 +0100, Gábor Kövesdán wrote: Unfortunately, it seems that this is still that unfinished driver from Damien, that circulates on the net everywhere, but it only works

Re: New wpi driver

2006-11-10 Thread Attilio Rao
2006/11/10, Attilio Rao [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2006/11/10, Max Laier [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 10 November 2006 10:37, Massimo Lusetti wrote: On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 22:39 +0100, Gábor Kövesdán wrote: Unfortunately, it seems that this is still that unfinished driver from Damien

Re: New wpi driver

2006-11-10 Thread Attilio Rao
2006/11/10, Attilio Rao [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2006/11/10, Attilio Rao [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2006/11/10, Max Laier [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 10 November 2006 10:37, Massimo Lusetti wrote: On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 22:39 +0100, Gábor Kövesdán wrote: Unfortunately, it seems that this is still

Re: New wpi driver

2006-11-10 Thread Attilio Rao
First of all, WPI_PCI_BAR0 might not be defined in this way, but it should really use PCIR_BAR() macro. Then, probabilly, gabor's device I/O space is relative to another BAR, so simply try all 6 using PCIR_BAR(n) where n range is 0-6 until it does allocate. Sorry, n ranges 0-5... (as I said