On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 03:17:11PM +0100, Bart De Schuymer wrote:
> Hello, Hi, > > I still haven't been able to reproduce it :( Do you still have the ability > > to test some things? If so, can you try the following (incremental) > > patches from http://bridge.sf.net/patchtracker-nf.html ? > > My problem is solved, at least the biggest problem. I was going to wait > until I bought some new nics to test as well before I post this, but seems > like it's taking a while for me to buy them ;) Heh.. I'm familiar with the problem. > My machine was overclocked (forgot it was) and the three nics were too much > I guess. It's now underclocked and I don't get any panics anymore with those > ping -s 20000 and above. Good to hear you found out what this was.. I was still wondering about it. > Hmm, even ping -s 2000 gives this message (and so, packet loss) for some > echo requests. Odd.. is it always the first packet that gets lost, or the second? Or does it vary? Do you have background network traffic going on while you do this? > The bridge box is running on 300 Mhz now (underclocked, it's a 500 Mhz box). > Maybe this is a performance problem? The network card ought to buffer the packet if the CPU doesn't keep up. Some network cards have really small buffers, but 2k really doesn't sound like too much asked for _any_ piece of hardware. > The motherboard of this machine is a piece of sh*t (packard bell comp *-*). (I'm still really happy with Packard Bell notebook.. bit heavy for modern standards, but it's still running perfectly after ~3 years..) > > 00_brnf_post_routing_paranoia.diff > > 01_brnf_clean_up_protocol_checks.diff > > Your 01 diff is vs a file called br_netfilter.c2 Thanks, fixed. cheers, Lennert _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/mailman/listinfo/bridge
