https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=271607
Bug 271607 depends on bug 271772, which changed state.
Bug 271772 Summary: ZFS with L2ARC: panic: VERIFY3(dev->l2ad_hand <=
dev->l2ad_evict) failed
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=271772
What|Removed
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=264439
Graham Perrin changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu |
|gzilla/show_bu
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=259939
Graham Perrin changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://bugs.freebsd.org/bu |
|gzilla/show_bu
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=257018
Graham Perrin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||grahamper...@freebsd.org
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=269777
--- Comment #6 from Charlie Li ---
Checksums for Python bytecode are dubious at best considering their
non-deterministic characteristics. There is absolutely no guarantee that
bytecode compiled during one run will match another bytecode com
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=269777
--- Comment #5 from Dan Langille ---
They may be or may not be harmless.
At best, they are false positives.
How can one know when they are false positives as opposed to something
malicious. We have checksums for that very reason.
Alert f
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=269777
Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |Works As Int
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=268400
--- Comment #21 from Daniel Ponte ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #20)
Yes, the patch has been stable for some time now.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=268400
--- Comment #20 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Daniel Ponte from comment #19)
Sorry for the delay. To be clear, the patch now appears to be holding up? I
am working on a proper patch now, for inclusion into 14.0.
--
You are receivi
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=271991
--- Comment #6 from Mark Johnston ---
So to fix the immediate problem (i.e., the crash):
- ng_bpf should stop copying/pulling up unless "usejit" is set. bpf_filter()
can handle mbuf chains, it doesn't require a contiguous buffer. Note tha
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=271991
--- Comment #5 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Ivan Rozhuk from comment #3)
I don't think m_pullup() is the right layer to handle unmapped mbufs. It gets
called very frequently, and mb_unmapped_to_ext() is expensive even when it does
n
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=272018
--- Comment #3 from Stefan Eßer ---
(In reply to Stefan Eßer from comment #2)
Since the PR is for FreeBSD-13.1:
The patch in review D34268 will probably still apply to the pci.c file in
13-STABLE, while the patch attached to this PR has be
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=272018
Stefan Eßer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||s...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #2 from
13 matches
Mail list logo
