From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 23:57:54 -0700
> I assume this came in via David's net-2.6.14 tree..
That's against -mm1, we fixed this shortly afterwards.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECT
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, David S. Miller wrote:
This is way many global+per-device sysctls work in the
networking.
The global setting is the default unless the per-device value
is set, in which case it overrides the global value.
This seems a bit strange as the per-device value is always set (exce
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:46:26AM +0200, Krzysztof Oledzki wrote:
Any new patches to test? ;)
As I said in an earlier message, you should patch racoon to delete
the old *outbound* SA when the new SA has been negotiated.
Did not receive this one, sor
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 09:26:31PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
BTW, the kernel isn't actually inconsistent if it doesn't switch to
the new SA immediately. After all, the old SA is still valid until it
expires. In this particular bug report, it's only b
Andrew Morton wrote :
> Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > From: "Philippe De Muyter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > Avoid ppp-generated kernel crashes on machines where unaligned accesses
> > > are
> > > forbidden (ie: 68000-based CPUs)
> > >
> > > Si
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 11:58:57PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:43:34PM -0700, David S. Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 20:55:06 +0400
> >
> > > Unmapping is repeatedl
Hopefully this is being sent to the proper group. Upgrading to the 2.6.13-rc4
(and rc3) kernels showed a failure in the 3c59x driver (compared to my previous
running kernel of 2.6.11.11).
Module loads fine, see log entry below:
ACPI: PCI Interrupt :02:08.0[A] -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Upgrading to the 2.6.13-rc4
> (and rc3) kernels showed a failure in the 3c59x driver (compared to my
> previous
> running kernel of 2.6.11.11).
Would you be able to place the 2.6.11 version of drivers/net/3c59x.c into
the 2.6.13-rc4 tree and see if tha
e1000 driver updated to fill in the new field in netdevice and use the new
ethtool, "get_perm_addr".
Signed-off-by: Jon Wetzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- linux-2.6.12.3/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_ethtool.c2005-07-28
17:28:53.0 -0500
+++ l
Adds a new field to net device to hold the permanent hardware address, and adds
a new generic ethtool_op function to get that address.
Signed-off-by: Jon Wetzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- linux-2.6.12.3/include/linux/netdevice.h2005-07-28 17:29
(resend, seems to have got lost)
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:42:21 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], netdev@vger.kernel.org, [EMAIL
PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 22:57:15 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], netdev@vger.kernel.org, [EMAIL
PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [F
Hi guys,
Well I have been reading net code seriously for two days, so I am still
basically a complete network klutz. But we have a nasty network-realted vm
deadlock that needs fixing and there seems to be little choice but to wade in
and try to sort things out.
Here is the basic problem:
Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Well I have been reading net code seriously for two days, so I am still
> basically a complete network klutz. But we have a nasty network-realted vm
> deadlock that needs fixing and there seems to be little choice but to wade in
> and try to sort things ou
Jeff Garzik writes:
> From: "Philippe De Muyter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Avoid ppp-generated kernel crashes on machines where unaligned accesses are
> forbidden (ie: 68000-based CPUs)
This patch seems a bit strange and/or incomplete. Are we trying to
get 2-byte alignment or 4-byte alignment of
I wrote:
> I really think there should be another flag bit set by pppd to say
> "must compress" rather than relying on the compressor telling you
> that.
I talked to Matt Domsch at OLS and agreed that I would add such a flag
(since waiting for someone who actually cared about it to do it doesn't
On 01.08.2005 [15:11:48 -0600], Josip Loncaric wrote:
> Line 589 of linux-2.6.11.10/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c is obviously wrong:
>
> skb->stamp.tv_usec = xtime.tv_nsec * 1000;
>
> To convert nsec to usec, one should divide instead of multiplying:
>
> skb->stamp.tv_use
Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 01.08.2005 [15:11:48 -0600], Josip Loncaric wrote:
>
>>Line 589 of linux-2.6.11.10/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c is obviously wrong:
>>
>>skb->stamp.tv_usec = xtime.tv_nsec * 1000;
>>
>>To convert nsec to usec, one should divide instead of multiplying:
>>
>>
On 02.08.2005 [02:03:59 +0200], Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 01.08.2005 [15:11:48 -0600], Josip Loncaric wrote:
> >
> >>Line 589 of linux-2.6.11.10/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c is obviously wrong:
> >>
> >>skb->stamp.tv_usec = xtime.tv_nsec * 1000;
> >>
> >>To
Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Can we assume that dev_alloc_skb will give us a 4-byte aligned
> skb->data? If we can then I suggest we change 3 to 1 in the skb_put
> and memmove above, and get rid of the if (since its condition will
> always be false).
The usual kmalloc alignment rules hold for skb->hea
Krzysztof Oledzki wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:46:26AM +0200, Krzysztof Oledzki wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Any new patches to test? ;)
>>
>>
>> As I said in an earlier message, you should patch racoon to delete
>> the old *outbound* SA when the new SA
CC net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.o
net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c: In function `init_or_cleanup':
net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c:1030: error: `proc_net_netfilter'
undeclared (first use in this function)
net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c:1030: error: (Each undeclared
identifier is reported on
On 8/1/05, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CC net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.o
> net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c: In function `init_or_cleanup':
> net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c:1030: error: `proc_net_netfilter'
> undeclared (first use in this function)
> net/netfilter/
On Tuesday 02 August 2005 07:30, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > ...being a net newbie, it is not entirely
> > clear to me that we can call netif_receive_skb directly when packets are
> > also being queued through the softnet interface. May I have some
> > guidance on this poin
24 matches
Mail list logo
