On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:51:57 -0700 K. Macy wrote
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Matthew Macy wrote:
> > You guys should really look at Samy Bahra's epoch based reclamation. I
> > solved a similar problem in drm/linuxkpi using it.
>
> The point being that this is a bu
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Matthew Macy wrote:
> You guys should really look at Samy Bahra's epoch based reclamation. I solved
> a similar problem in drm/linuxkpi using it.
The point being that this is a bug in the TCP life cycle handling
_not_ in callouts. Churning the callout interface
You guys should really look at Samy Bahra's epoch based reclamation. I solved a
similar problem in drm/linuxkpi using it.
-M
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 02:58:56 -0700 Julien Charbon
wrote
>
> Hi Randall,
>
> On 6/25/16 4:41 PM, Randall Stewart via freebsd-net wrote:
> > Ok
Hi -net,
On 12/7/15 4:36 PM, Julien Charbon wrote:
> On 30/05/14 06:12, k simon wrote:
>> Does any plan commit and MFC to the 10-stable ?
>
> I got a bit of interest of having the performance improvements for
> short-lived TCP connections in 10-stable. Just to share the current
> status to
Hi Randall,
On 6/25/16 4:41 PM, Randall Stewart via freebsd-net wrote:
> Ok
>
> Lets try this again with my source changed to my @freebsd.net :-)
>
> Now I am also attaching a patch for you Gleb, this will take some poking to
> get in to your NF-head since it incorporates some changes we made
