On Monday 08 August 2005 18:47, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Marko Zec wrote:
> > On Monday 08 August 2005 12:32, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > > Dave+Seddon wrote:
> > > > BTW, I'd be interested to know people's thoughts on multiple IP
> > > > stacks on FreeBSD. It would be really cool to be able to giv
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 11:04, Marko Zec wrote:
> On Monday 08 August 2005 18:47, Andre Oppermann wrote:
...
> Andre,
>
> there's no doubt almost any idea or particularly software can be
> improved. Could you provide a more elaborate argumentation to your
> claim the network stack cloning conc
Dave+Seddon wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> Itâs very cool to hear you guys are interested in separate routing.
>
> > Having multiple stacks duplicates a lot of structures for each stack
> > which don't have to be duplicated. With your approach you need a new
> > jail for every new stack. In each
Marko Zec wrote:
>
> On Monday 08 August 2005 18:47, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > Marko Zec wrote:
> > > On Monday 08 August 2005 12:32, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > > > Dave+Seddon wrote:
> > > > > BTW, I'd be interested to know people's thoughts on multiple IP
> > > > > stacks on FreeBSD. It would
(maintainers or effective maintainers of the affected device drivers CC'd
-- see below for the details, sorry about dups)
I've recently been reviewing the use of if_flags with respect to network
stack and driver locking. Part of that work has been to break the field
out into two separate fi
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 10:34:53PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
> Could you add a hard-coded entry to WITNESS to place the udpinp lock
> before the in_multi_mtx in the lock order, and let me know which path
> resulted in the opposite order from this one?
I hard-coded the correct order, but am now
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 14:41, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Marko Zec wrote:
> > On Monday 08 August 2005 18:47, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > > Marko Zec wrote:
> > > > On Monday 08 August 2005 12:32, Andre Oppermann wrote:
...
> > > > > There is a patch doing that for FreeBSD 4.x. However while
> > >
I'm getting the following panic on my RELENG_6 test box:
xl1f0: BUG: if_attach called without if_alloc'd input()
Where should I be looking to track this down? I suspect it has to do with a
custom kernel, it wasn't doing it when i was running GENERIC
--
Darcy Buskermolen
Wavefire Technologies C
Marko Zec wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 09 August 2005 14:41, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> ...
> > I don't want to have non-global interface lists in the kernel.
>
> But sooner or later you _will_ end up with some sort of non-global
> interface lists after all, just as you stated yourself at the beginning
>
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:54:21AM -0700, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> I'm getting the following panic on my RELENG_6 test box:
>
> xl1f0: BUG: if_attach called without if_alloc'd input()
>
> Where should I be looking to track this down? I suspect it has to do with a
> custom kernel, it wasn't doi
Hi!
I just noticed, that uploading a file over a LANG (at around 5.7Mb/s) resulted
in around 25% CPU consumption by the ftpd.
I think, that's unusual for a Pentium4 -- what is the process doing?
The machine is running 5.2.1-RELEASE and has TrustedBSD extensions.
-mi
___
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 11:16, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:54:21AM -0700, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> > I'm getting the following panic on my RELENG_6 test box:
> >
> > xl1f0: BUG: if_attach called without if_alloc'd input()
> >
> > Where should I be looking to track this down
> I haven't fully explored all applications and possible tie-ins with
> jails, virtual stacks etc. but it looks very interesting.
>
> For example I want to have multiple routing tables within the same
> stack. These routing tables can be opaque or fall-through and match
> on the source and destina
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 13:48, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2005 11:16, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:54:21AM -0700, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> > > I'm getting the following panic on my RELENG_6 test box:
> > >
> > > xl1f0: BUG: if_attach called without if_
I am running a generic kernel with all the debugging knobs.
if I use BitTorrent or Gnutella in X the computer reboots after a few minutes.
>From the console it drops into the debugger deal. But will not give me
a crash dump.
Under the assumption that something was wrong with the ath driver I
tried
> > I just noticed, that uploading a file over a LANG (at around
> > 5.7Mb/s) resulted in around 25% CPU consumption by the ftpd.
> >
> > I think, that's unusual for a Pentium4 -- what is the process doing?
>
> Check the client does not use ascii mode when uploading (getc() vs
> read()).
That's q
Kevin Downey wrote:
I am running a generic kernel with all the debugging knobs.
if I use BitTorrent or Gnutella in X the computer reboots after a few minutes.
From the console it drops into the debugger deal. But will not give me
a crash dump.
The stack trace below isn't a crash, it's just wi
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, 15:49-0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I just noticed, that uploading a file over a LANG (at around
> 5.7Mb/s) resulted in around 25% CPU consumption by the ftpd.
>
> I think, that's unusual for a Pentium4 -- what is the process doing?
Check the client does not use ascii
18 matches
Mail list logo
