Got this on a SMP (2 physical, HTT off) box during moderate tcp (http)
load. Any ideas?
FreeBSD pxecmb3 5.4-RELEASE-p6 FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p6 #0: Fri Jul 29
19:57:15 CEST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PROXY i386
SCHED_4BSD, ADAPTIVE_GIANT, mpsafenet=1
Fatal trap 12: page fa
hi,
Just a little background - I want to fire events at
10 microsecond granularity in FreeBSD, and it was suggested to use
Hz=10 in the kernel config file.
This is a good approach, only if I schedule events every 10 us ( which i
am not doing ). Due to this high frequency interrupts, I am i
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 09:11:33AM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
> I don't see it that way, because low level languages like assembler
> are normally very efficient and highly granular. The underlying
> opcode language of IPFW is low level for sure. But I would classify
> IPFW's "language," as presen
> I'm testing rfc2385 support with some of our equipment with current
> as of a few days ago, and the support seems, well, rather broken.
I think there is a bug in syncache_respond().
In tcp_syncache.c rev 1.77, tcp_signature_compute() is called before
filling the TCP SACK Permitted option and th
I am posting this to -net since I got zip response on -current...
Hi,
I'm testing rfc2385 support with some of our equipment with current as of a
few days ago, and the support seems, well, rather broken.
I have the following options in my kernel
options TCP_SIGNATURE
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005, Milscvaer wrote:
FreeBSD ought to add per-socket socket options to allow a programmer to
turn on and off the don't fragment bit for UDP and the UDP checksum, on
a per socket basis.
FreeBSD needs to implement this feature. We requested this same feature
years ago and I c
Hi Brett, Luigi, all,
> >original
> >
> >ipfw add 1000 dosomething cond1 cond2 cond3 cond4 cond5 ... condN
> >
> >negated:
> >
> >ipfw add 1000 skipto 1001 cond1 cond2 cond3 cond4 cond5 ... condN
> >ipfw add 1000 dosomething
>
> This doesn't work, because you must transfor
