From: Krzysztof Halasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 01:47:18 +0100
> Probably someone else should look at it/them?
I'm the networking maintainer, you have to wait for me to
get to it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EM
"David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What the RFC 2863 patch status?
>
> I haven't had time to review, and I'll be %100 honest with you
> that it's at the bottom of my priority list, it simply isn't
> that interesting :-)
Probably someone else should look at it/them?
--
Krzysztof Hal
Turning struct iphdr::tot_len into __be16 added sparse warning.
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/drivers/net/tg3.c b/drivers/net/tg3.c
index cefb0c0..729a107 100644
--- a/drivers/net/tg3.c
+++ b/drivers/net/tg3.c
@@ -3650,7 +3650,7 @@ static int tg3_start_xmit(struc
On Dec 27 2005, at 10:45, Stefan Roese was caught saying:
>
> Understood. But a total rewrite of this code is unfortunately not an option,
> since it's just too much work (without a sponsor).
>
> > > It most likely is the same code. Currently it's version 2.0. This version
> > > is available und
On Dec 27 2005, at 15:08, Krzysztof Halasa was caught saying:
> jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No experience with the 4xx but some with the other intel NPs.
> > Is the driver a "dual stack" approach that Intel typically
> > has?
>
> No, the Ethernet driver is Linux-only and uses the acce
On Dec 27 2005, at 08:49, jamal was caught saying:
> A question for you: Does the 4XX allow you to rewrite the
> microcode? And if yes, why would you push this intel specific
> microcode?
No. The NPEs on the 4xx are not user-programmable like the uEngines.
You basically download the FW into the NP
From: "Kris Katterjohn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 02:36:06 -0800
> This patch checks to make sure that the number of instructions doesn't surpass
> BPF_MAXINSNS in sk_chk_filter().
>
> Signed-off-by: Kris Katterjohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I added your patch, and removed the check on
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 16:01:55 -0200
> Please consider pulling from:
>
> master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.16.git
Pulled, thanks Arnaldo.
I'm going to apply Yoshifuji's IPV6 deadlock fix to 2.6.15, and then
rebase
From: Krzysztof Halasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 15:13:25 +0100
> What the RFC 2863 patch status?
I haven't had time to review, and I'll be %100 honest with you
that it's at the bottom of my priority list, it simply isn't
that interesting :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Currently all network protocols need to call dev_ioctl as the default
fallback in their ioctl implementations. This patch adds a fallback
to dev_ioctl to sock_ioctl if the protocol returned -ENOIOCTLCMD.
This way all the procotol ioctl handlers can be simplified and we d
Disable TX status deferral (EMACx_MR[MWSW=001]) in half-duplex mode.
I have two reports when EMAC stops transmitting when connected to a
hub. TX ring debug printouts show complete mess when this happens,
probably hardware collision handling doesn't work quite well in this
mode.
This is relevant
Currently all network protocols need to call dev_ioctl as the default
fallback in their ioctl implementations. This patch adds a fallback
to dev_ioctl to sock_ioctl if the protocol returned -ENOIOCTLCMD.
This way all the procotol ioctl handlers can be simplified and we don't
need to export dev_ioc
Hi David,
Please consider pulling from:
master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.16.git
- Arnaldo
tree 006d8249db3be900c25e634fe1db2ab4000bfdc5
parent eab8454851aad8239612b002c19c0a8e7a38b85f
author Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1135703877 -0200
committer Arn
Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 10:24:06AM -0500, Steve Lazaridis wrote:
Hi,
Hello,
I'm running on a MIPSbe(AMD au1550) CPU and I'm getting kernel crashes
when pumping a lot of traffic through two bridges using iperf.
Can you reproduce it without the binary-only ker
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 10:24:06AM -0500, Steve Lazaridis wrote:
> Hi,
Hello,
> I'm running on a MIPSbe(AMD au1550) CPU and I'm getting kernel crashes
> when pumping a lot of traffic through two bridges using iperf.
Can you reproduce it without the binary-only kernel modules loaded?
--L
-
T
Dave,
This minor bug fix should probably go into 2.6.15.
cheers,
jamal
fix cmd type in genl_ops to be consistent to u8
Signed-off-by: Per Liden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ACKed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff --git a/include/net/genetlink.h b/include/net/genetlink.h
index 52d8b1a..
Hi,
I'm running on a MIPSbe(AMD au1550) CPU and I'm getting kernel crashes
when pumping a lot of traffic through two bridges using iperf.
kernel: linux-2.6.13-rc7 ~ from mips-linux.org
The setup is:
[host a]<-->[bridge a]<>[bridge b]<-->[host b]
host a: iperf client
host b: iperf server
Hello.
Again, we need to fix one more dead lock... sorry..
We need to release idev->lcok before we call addrconf_dad_stop().
It calls ipv6_addr_del(), which will hold idev->lock.
Bug spotted by Yasuyuki KOZAKAI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Signed-off-by: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git
On Tue, 2005-27-12 at 15:13 +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What the RFC 2863 patch status?
It is in Dave's hands - pending review and publication being targeted
for possibly 2.6.16 (Dave to make that call).
cheers,
jamal
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netd
On Tue, 2005-27-12 at 15:05 +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 08:49:50AM -0500, jamal wrote:
>
> > A question for you: Does the 4XX allow you to rewrite the microcode?
>
> As far as I know, there are no docs for this, at least not any publicly
> available ones.
>
> Chapte
Hi,
What the RFC 2863 patch status?
--
Krzysztof Halasa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No experience with the 4xx but some with the other intel NPs.
> Is the driver a "dual stack" approach that Intel typically
> has?
No, the Ethernet driver is Linux-only and uses the access library.
Both are crap BTW, the library is much worse.
Actually I think
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 08:49:50AM -0500, jamal wrote:
> A question for you: Does the 4XX allow you to rewrite the microcode?
As far as I know, there are no docs for this, at least not any publicly
available ones.
Chapter 4 in the IXP42X Developer's Manual is titled "Network Processor
Engines (N
On Tue, 2005-27-12 at 10:54 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
>
> Yes, that's the ethernet driver using this access lib to
> communicate with the
> NPE's. This driver is published under the GPL.
>
No experience with the 4xx but some with the other intel NPs.
Is the driver a "dual stack" approach tha
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 10:45:23AM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > > > > The main question I have is, where should the IXP4xx access-library
> > > > > be located in the kernel directory structure?
> > > >
> > > > Maybe you can explain to the list readers what it is and what it does?
> > >
> > > It'
On Tue, 2005-27-12 at 10:03 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:
> In theory this patch is absolutely correct and we should go
> that way one day. The problem is that iproute sets NLM_F_EXCL
> by default when adding rules so this patch would modify the
> behaviour of all existing "ip rule add" usages.
>
> T
On Saturday 24 December 2005 17:36, Marc Singer wrote:
> > > It most likely is the same code. Currently it's version 2.0. This
> > > version is available under a special Intel license
> > > (http://www.intel.com/design/network/products/npfamily/ixp425swr1.htm)
> > > and under the BSD license (when
On Saturday 24 December 2005 15:07, Deepak Saxena wrote:
> On Dec 21 2005, at 15:48, Stefan Roese was caught saying:
> > Hi Lennert,
> >
> > On Wednesday 21 December 2005 14:52, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 01:00:34PM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > > > The main question I
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 17:08:26 +0900 (JST)
> Chinen-san has run tests against current net-2.6.16 tree.
> We could run tests (Phase-1 for Host, Phase-2 Core for Host),
> we see some regression in IPv6 neighbor discovery.
> We have not tracked down closel
> > I realized that in fib_rules.c the inet_rtm_new_rule()
> > function adds rules without checking if they already
> > exist. This may result in duplicate rules being added.
> > It makes it difficult to remove a rule when it is
> > added multiple times (with the intention that it would
> > be adde
://testlab.linux-ipv6.org/tahi-autorun.2/ct-v6logo2-host_net-2.6.16-20051227/
Phase-1 (Host) at:
http://testlab.linux-ipv6.org/tahi-autorun.2/ct-v6logo1-host_net-2.6.16-20051227/
Regards,
--
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki @ USAGI Project <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG-FP : 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 480
31 matches
Mail list logo
