Robert Watson writes:
>
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> > Speaking of net.isr, is there any reason why if_simloop() calls
> > netisr_queue() rather than netisr_dispatch()?
>
> Yes -- it's basically to prevent recursion for loopback traffic, which can
> result in both
Note that lge() has a bzero() call after the contigmalloc(), but M_ZERO is
probably better to use:
sc->lge_ldata = contigmalloc(sizeof(struct lge_list_data), M_DEVBUF,
M_NOWAIT, 0, 0x, PAGE_SIZE, 0);
...
bzero(sc->lge_ldata, sizeof(struct lge_list_data));
Yes, i;ve missed that.
On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
Speaking of net.isr, is there any reason why if_simloop() calls
netisr_queue() rather than netisr_dispatch()?
Yes -- it's basically to prevent recursion for loopback traffic, which can
result in both lock orders and general concerns regarding reent
On Friday 07 October 2005 04:06 am, Yuriy N. Shkandybin wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I saw John Baldwin commit to if_lge.c rev 1.43 and perform same changes for
> if_nge.c I've tested it and it works.
> Patch in attachment or available from
> http://www.netams.com/if_nge.c.patch
>
>
>
> Also i've noticed i
On Friday 07 October 2005 04:06 am, Yuriy N. Shkandybin wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I saw John Baldwin commit to if_lge.c rev 1.43 and perform same changes for
> if_nge.c I've tested it and it works.
> Patch in attachment or available from
> http://www.netams.com/if_nge.c.patch
>
>
>
> Also i've noticed i
Speaking of net.isr, is there any reason why if_simloop() calls
netisr_queue() rather than netisr_dispatch()?
Drew
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL
Forget to mention that my test machines, one is 7.0-CURRENT, another one is
FreeBSD 6.0-RC1. So I think we can MFC to 6.x too.
Cai, Quanqing
On 10/12/05, Cai, Quanqing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I noticed there is bug filed by KIYOHARA Takashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> with a patch,
Hi guys,
I noticed there is bug filed by KIYOHARA Takashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
with a patch, link is here:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/73852, I tested if_fwip with
this patch, it works great for me. When we switch byte-order two times on
i386, the byte-order will back to origina
I have an unsupported patch for up to gcc 4.0. I'll send it as separate
email to you and will eventually put it on my web page.
Martin
Thomas Quinot wrote:
All,
Is anyone running any RSVP daemon on a FreeBSD release >= 5?
I would like to do RSVP with ALTQ, but the KOM RSVP daemon (3.0f) won't
All,
Is anyone running any RSVP daemon on a FreeBSD release >= 5?
I would like to do RSVP with ALTQ, but the KOM RSVP daemon (3.0f) won't
compile under 5.4-REL (many C++ problems).
Thomas.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.o
On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:01:11 +0100 (BST),
rwatson wrote:
If I don't hear anything back in the near future, I will commit a
change to 7.x to make direct dispatch the default, in order to let a
broader community do the testing. :-) If you are setup t
At Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:01:11 +0100 (BST),
rwatson wrote:
> If I don't hear anything back in the near future, I will commit a
> change to 7.x to make direct dispatch the default, in order to let a
> broader community do the testing. :-) If you are setup to easily
> test stability and performance re
12 matches
Mail list logo
