https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197882
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|freebsd-b...@freebsd.org|freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
--
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197887
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|freebsd-b...@freebsd.org|freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
--
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197997
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|freebsd-b...@freebsd.org|freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
--
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193802
Hiren Panchasara changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e...@freebsd.org,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 08:25:59PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> A> [snip]
> A>
> A> I think Mike's approach is good - it makes it easy to MFC to 10.2
> A> since there's extended lifecycle stuff to do there - and then we can
> A> plan out ho
glebius added a comment.
Nikos,
acking that I see the patches. Right now I'm waiting for pf to stablize after
recent patches to fragment handling. Kristof is working on the known problem.
Meanwhile you can finish your patch moving from "almost there" to "there" :)
If you got any questions about
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 08:25:59PM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
A> [snip]
A>
A> I think Mike's approach is good - it makes it easy to MFC to 10.2
A> since there's extended lifecycle stuff to do there - and then we can
A> plan out how do the "betterer" fix after it's landed and churned
A> things.
..
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:17:03PM -0600, Mike Karels wrote:
M> > M> I'm not sure what would be different about your approach; you mentioned
"n"
M> > M> versions rather than "x" versions of the ioctls, but I don't know what
you
M> > M> have in mind for encoding. Any compatible version would be l
On Friday, February 27, 2015 10:32:17 AM Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 27 February 2015 at 10:07, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Friday, February 27, 2015 10:03:33 AM Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> Is this also a bug on -9 and -10?
> >
> > Yes. I may merge just the tcp_syncache.c part of this change down to
>
On 27 February 2015 at 10:07, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, February 27, 2015 10:03:33 AM Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> Is this also a bug on -9 and -10?
>
> Yes. I may merge just the tcp_syncache.c part of this change down to stable
> branches.
Cool, thanks.
Placing half-completed connections on t
On Friday, February 27, 2015 10:03:33 AM Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Is this also a bug on -9 and -10?
Yes. I may merge just the tcp_syncache.c part of this change down to stable
branches.
>
> -a
>
>
> On 27 February 2015 at 07:22, Quattlebaum, Ryan
>
> wrote:
> > Thanks, John. That's almost exa
Is this also a bug on -9 and -10?
-a
On 27 February 2015 at 07:22, Quattlebaum, Ryan
wrote:
> Thanks, John. That's almost exactly the approach we were considering.
>
> - Ryan Q
>
> From: John Baldwin
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 10:20 AM
> To: fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165622
John Baldwin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #4 fro
Thanks, John. That's almost exactly the approach we were considering.
- Ryan Q
From: John Baldwin
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 10:20 AM
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Cc: Quattlebaum, Ryan; Adrian Chadd
Subject: Re: Accessing socket APIs soon after accept
On Friday, January 16, 2015 05:07:28 PM Quattlebaum, Ryan wrote:
> Hi, Adrian. Thanks for taking a look at this.
>
> We're using FreeBSD 8.2 and httpd-2.4.10 with arp-1.5.1 and apr-util-1.5.4.
>
> The problem we're seeing is pretty intermittent, so I hope this test case
> can
15 matches
Mail list logo
