Rick Jones wrote:
>
> > Default of 536 is sadistic (and apaprently will be changed eventually
> > to stop tears of poor people whose providers not only supply them
> > with bogus mtu values sort of 552 or even 296, but also jailed them
> > to some proxy or masquearding domain), but it is still ri
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Ookhoi writes:
> > We have exactly the same problem but in our case it depends on the
> > following three conditions: 1, kernel 2.4 (2.2 is fine), 2, windows ip
> > header compression turned on, 3, a free internet access provider in
> > Holland called 'Wish' (whic
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Ookhoi writes:
> > We have exactly the same problem but in our case it depends on the
> > following three conditions: 1, kernel 2.4 (2.2 is fine), 2, windows ip
> > header compression turned on, 3, a free internet access provider in
> > Holland called 'Wish' (whic
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Jordan Mendelson writes:
> > Now, if it didn't have the side effect of dropping packets left and
> > right after ~4000 open connections (simultaneously), I could finally
> > move our production system to 2.4.x.
>
>
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Jordan Mendelson writes:
> > Now, if it didn't have the side effect of dropping packets left and
> > right after ~4000 open connections (simultaneously), I could finally
> > move our production system to 2.4.x.
>
&g
I've been having some problems with the recent 2.4.x kernels with my
digital camera. The s10sh program accesses the Canon S20 digital camera
using libusb in conjunction with usbfs to download images. Apparently,
incorrect data about the size of images is being sent down the line
after the first i
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> In a move unanimously hailed by the trade press and industry analysts as
> being a sure sign of incipient braindamage, Linus Torvalds (also known as
> the "father of Linux" or, more commonly, as "mush-for-brains") decided
> that enough is enough, and that things don't ge
dep wrote:
>
> On Thursday 04 January 2001 07:36 pm, Jordan Mendelson wrote:
>
> | Go home, get out the epson salts, fill up the tub with hot water
> | and just relax.
>
> right after getting the source posted on kernel.org!
Sigh, try:
http://www.kernel.org/pub
Alright, this is driving me nuts. I have a Canon S20 digital camera
hooked up to a Sony XG series laptop via the USB port and am using s10sh
to access it. s10sh uses libusb 0.1.1, but I've also tried it using
libusb 0.1.2 without any luck. libusb uses usbfs to access to the device
from userspace.
Greg KH wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 07:52:15PM -0800, Jordan Mendelson wrote:
> >
> > Alright, this is driving me nuts. I have a Canon S20 digital camera
> > hooked up to a Sony XG series laptop via the USB port and am using s10sh
> > to access it. s10sh us
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 11:16:21PM -0800, Jordan Mendelson wrote:
> > > It is clear though, that something is messing with or corrupting the
> > > packets. One thing you might try is turning off TCP header
> > > compression for the PPP
Jordan Mendelson wrote:
>
> We are seeing a performance slowdown between Windows PPP users and
> servers running 2.4.0-test10. Attached is a tcpdump log of the
> connection. The machines is without TCP ECN support. The Windows machine
> is running Windows 98 SE 4.10. A diale
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
>Date:Mon, 06 Nov 2000 18:17:19 -0800
>From: Jordan Mendelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>18:54:57.394894 eth0 > 64.124.41.177. > 209.179.248.69.1238: .
>2429:2429(0) ack 506 win 6432 (DF)
>
> A
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
>Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 21:20:39 -0800
>From: Jordan Mendelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>It looks to me like there is an artificial delay in 2.4.0 which is
>slowing down the traffic to unbearable levels.
>
> No,
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
>Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 22:13:23 -0800
>From: Jordan Mendelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>There is a possibility that we are hitting an upper level bandwidth
>limit between us an our upstream provider due to a misconfig
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
>Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 22:44:00 -0800
>From: Jordan Mendelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Attached to this message are dumps from the windows 98 machine using
>windump and the linux 2.4.0-test10. Sorry the time stamps do
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
>Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 23:16:21 -0800
>From: Jordan Mendelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>"David S. Miller" wrote:
>> It is clear though, that something is messing with or corrupting the
>> packet
[this message was previously cc'ed to tulip-bug]
It seems that my Xircom report refuses to work correctly when first
initialized. I'm running Linux 2.4.0-test7 with the standard
xircom_tulip_cb driver. I can get the Xircom to work just fine, but I
seem to always need to go through a song and danc
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> The IP addresses are important because we can use them to find out
> what TCP implementations shrink their offered windows.
>
> Actually, you don't need to tell me or anyone else what these IP
> addresses are, you can instead run one of the "remote OS identifier"
> p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> > I'll keep looking.
>
> Is it easy to reproduce? If so, try to make tcpdump, which
> covers one of these messages.
It's extremely rare. We maintain persistent connections open for long
periods of time and even though a user who triggered it is online, i
Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Dan Kegel wrote:
> >> [ http://www.kegel.com/dkftpbench/Poller_bench.html ]
> >> [ With only one active fd and N idle ones, poll's execution time scales
> >> [ as 6N on Solaris, but as 300N on Linux. ]
> >
> > Basically, poll() is _fundamentally_ a O
Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> Jordan Mendelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > An implementation of /dev/poll for Linux already exists and has shown to
> > be more scalable than using RT signals under my tests. A patch for 2.2.x
> > and 2.4.x should be available at the Linux Scalab
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > I don't see the problem. You have the poll table allocated in the kernel,
> > the drivers directly change it and the user mmaps it (I was not proposing
> > to let poll make a kiobuf out of the passed array)
> Th eproblem wi
I've been receiving these error messages during times of near complete
memory depletion. This particular machine runs a bare minimum of
processes and a our own application which is a threaded long running (1
day, 5:39) which consumes most of the resources on the machine. Oddly
enough however, the
We are seeing a performance slowdown between Windows PPP users and
servers running 2.4.0-test10. Attached is a tcpdump log of the
connection. The machines is without TCP ECN support. The Windows machine
is running Windows 98 SE 4.10. A dialed up over PPP w/ TCP header
compression. The Linux m
This is probably due to the source being 'none', but the shm mount point
can be mounted twice at the same mount point.
Shouldn't mount(2) return -EBUSY in this case?
# cat /etc/mtab
/dev/hda4 / ext2 rw,errors=remount-ro,errors=remount-ro 0 0
proc /proc proc rw 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,gid
I've begun to test 2.4.0 kernels on some high traffic machines to see
what kind of difference it makes. I have seen a lot of these error
messages in dmesg and although they don't seem to happen very often and
seem harmless, I figured I'd report it anyway. They show up in groups
(mostly) from the
Daniel Walton wrote:
>
> The server in question is running the tulip driver. dmesg reports:
>
> Linux Tulip driver version 0.9.13 (January 2, 2001)
>
> I have seen this same behavior on a couple of my servers running 3com
> 3c905c adaptors as well.
>
> The last time I was experiencing it I re
28 matches
Mail list logo
