Re: [uml-user] Does UML Currently Emulate SMP?

2007-04-20 Thread Stephens, Allan
OK, I've got an answer to the first half of my query. Thanks! Now, does anyone know the latest kernel version where SMP support worked? Regards, Al > -Original Message- > From: kewlemer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 3:05 PM > To: Ste

[uml-user] Does UML Currently Emulate SMP?

2007-04-18 Thread Stephens, Allan
[Apologies if you've received this twice. My earlier posting appears to have been lost.] What is the status of SMP support in UML? (That is, can I start up a UML session that uses separate processes on my uniprocessor host to emulate a machine with multiple CPUs?) Jeff Dike's "User Mode Linux"

Re: [uml-user] [uml-devel] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-08-04 Thread Stephens, Allan
y protocol software knows that it has to handle packets that weren't destined for the interface. Regards, Al Stephens Wind River > -Original Message- > From: Paolo Giarrusso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:10 AM > To: Jeff Dike; Stephens,

Re: [uml-user] [uml-devel] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-08-03 Thread Stephens, Allan
Hi Jeff: See comments below. > -Original Message- > From: Jeff Dike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:26 PM > To: Stephens, Allan > Cc: Paolo Giarrusso; > user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; > user-mode-linux-user@lists.sour

Re: [uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-08-03 Thread Stephens, Allan
cting a (simulated) interface to receive traffic that wasn't addressed to it unless it has been explicitly configured as promiscuous. Regards, Al > -Original Message- > From: Paolo Giarrusso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 11:05 AM > To: Stephens,

Re: [uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-08-02 Thread Stephens, Allan
this problem being by manually configuring the interfaces as promiscuous, but it still looks like a bug. Does this (finally) make sense? Regards, Al > -Original Message- > From: Blaisorblade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 2:37 PM > To: Stephens,

Re: [uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-08-01 Thread Stephens, Allan
s, Al Stephens Wind River > -Original Message- > From: Paolo Giarrusso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:56 PM > To: Stephens, Allan; user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: RE: [uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug? >

Re: [uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-07-31 Thread Stephens, Allan
and things are working as I expected. Thanks so much for your help! Regards, Al Stephens Wind River > -Original Message- > From: Blaisorblade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 4:20 AM > To: user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net > Cc: Stephens

[uml-user] Promiscuous mode interface bug?

2006-07-26 Thread Stephens, Allan
Hi there: I've been running UML using Linux 2.6.17 (guest) and 2.6.12 (host) and configured a guest with a pair of Ethernet multicast interfaces as shown below. (Note that I didn't configure any IP addresses, as I'm not trying to use them to carry IP traffic.) uml_mconsole config eth1=mcast,0