On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Konstantin Belousov
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 06:15:54AM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 02:16:17PM -0700, Maksim Yevmenkin wrote:
>> M> hello,
>> M>
>> M> for sometime now i've been repeatedly annoyed by the fact that 10G
>> M> interf
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 06:15:54AM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 02:16:17PM -0700, Maksim Yevmenkin wrote:
> M> hello,
> M>
> M> for sometime now i've been repeatedly annoyed by the fact that 10G
> M> interfaces lie about their ifi_baudrate. i would like to propose
> M> sim
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 02:16:17PM -0700, Maksim Yevmenkin wrote:
M> hello,
M>
M> for sometime now i've been repeatedly annoyed by the fact that 10G
M> interfaces lie about their ifi_baudrate. i would like to propose
M> simple (hopefuly) change to address this.
M>
M> quick summary of the problem:
hello,
for sometime now i've been repeatedly annoyed by the fact that 10G
interfaces lie about their ifi_baudrate. i would like to propose
simple (hopefuly) change to address this.
quick summary of the problem:
struct if_data {
...
u_char ifi_spare_char1;/* spare byte */
