Synopsis: [iwn] [panic] iwn_auth being called with wrong ni_chan
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Aug 14 21:00:27 UTC 2011
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer(s).
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?p
- Original Message -
From: "Lawrence Stewart"
Here's my tweaked version of Andre's patch:
http://people.freebsd.org/~lstewart/patches/misctcp/tcp_reass.c-logdebug%2bmissingsegment-20110811-lstewart.diff
Still testing this and just noticed that the patch fails to
compile when INVARIANT
12.08.2011 20:55, Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
Hi.
Just after upgrade from 8.2 to 9.0 kernel panics:
panic: m_uiotombuf: progress != total
cpuid = 1
KDB: enter: panic
[ thread pid 1194 tid 100132 ]
Stopped at kdb_enter+0x3b: movq $0,0x913242(%rip)
db> bt
Tracing pid 1194 tid 100132 td 0xfe0005c
Old Synopsis: kernel panic with IPsec in transport mode ; -current kernel
New Synopsis: [ipsec] [panic] kernel panic with IPsec in transport mode ;
-current kernel
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Aug 14 10:33:52
Old Synopsis: [patch] in_ifscrubprefix() - network route can be installed for
interfaces marked down
New Synopsis: [netinet] [patch] in_ifscrubprefix() - network route can be
installed for interfaces marked down
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linim
Old Synopsis: [path] arp_ifscrub() is called even if IFF_NOARP flag is set
New Synopsis: [netinet] [patch] arp_ifscrub() is called even if IFF_NOARP flag
is set
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Aug 14 10:29:32 UTC
Old Synopsis: [panic] panic: soabort: so_count
New Synopsis: [tcp] [panic] panic: soabort: so_count
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Aug 14 10:24:24 UTC 2011
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Appears to be tcp-related.
ht
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 07:32:06PM -0500, David Duchscher wrote:
D> My two cents.
D>
D> We rely on the arp load balance feature. We certainly don't find it
useless. Looking at ip load balancing, it would also mean that we would no
longer be able to grow bandwidth with additional systems since
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:04:14PM -0700, Rudy (bulk) wrote:
R> > I'd like to present for review and early testing (for brave ones)
R> > a new CARP implementation.
R>
R> Super! I'll use it but am not brave enough for alpha. Maybe beta. :)
R>
R> Will this support multiple VHID per interface?
