On Friday, 24 May 2013, Axel Fischer wrote:
Additionally I noticed the following TCP errors
with netstat -s ...:
1186 data packets (1717328 bytes) retransmitted
6847875 window update packets
2319 duplicate acks
25831 out-of-order packets (37403288 bytes)
3733 discarded due to memory
On 23 May 2013 19:00, Lino Sanfilippo lsan...@marvell.com wrote:
Is there a known issue concerning high traffic on Tx and Rx paths? Are there
any system
settings I could adjust to get the expected performance? Any hints are very
appreciated.
check your ierrs and oerrs: netstat -s 1, I've
On 19 January 2012 11:55, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote:
Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
On 19 January 2012 00:57, Dieter BSD dieter...@engineer.com wrote:
Idea 2: Give it status. Set up a web page with PR fixing stats
name/handle..total PRs fixed...fixed in last 12 months...average
On 19 January 2012 16:35, Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com wrote:
Igor Mozolevsky writes:
Wouldn't this discourage even more people from helping?
Would this not separate people who have a genuine interest in
contributing from tinker-monkeys?
Did I miss a previous definition
On 18 January 2012 09:25, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
on 18/01/2012 02:16 Igor Mozolevsky said the following:
Seriously, WTF is the point of having a PR system that allows patches
to be submitted??! When I submit a patch I fix *your* code (not yours
personally, but you get my gist
On 18 January 2012 11:08, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
on 18/01/2012 12:54 Igor Mozolevsky said the following:
[snip]
There are about 5000 open PRs for FreeBSD base system, maybe more.
There are only a few dozens of active FreeBSD developers. Maybe less for
any
given particular
On 18 January 2012 13:11, Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Igor Mozolevsky i...@hybrid-lab.co.uk
wrote:
One way to
encourage people to fix their code would be to prevent them from
committing to -CURRENT once they pass a certain threshold
On 18 January 2012 17:06, Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
hack...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Julian Elischer
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 10:56 AM
To: Mark Felder
Cc:
On 18 January 2012 17:30, Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 Jan 2012 17:12, Igor Mozolevsky i...@hybrid-lab.co.uk wrote:
Back in the days when the UK banks ran ATMs, c on Windows NT (I
have no idea what they are running now)
Well I've not seen any BSOD'd cashpoints around
On 18 January 2012 18:27, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
I've suggested this before without much response, but since this thread
seems to be encouraging repetition I'll give it another go. ;)
I think a bounty system would be very effective(e.g. micro-donations of
recent
On 18 January 2012 17:56, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
on 18/01/2012 19:13 Daniel Eischen said the following:
someone who owns a branch... - If you cut release N.0, do not
move -current to N+1. Keep -current at N for a while, prohibiting
ABI changes, and any other risky changes. If a
On 18 January 2012 22:31, Mark Blackman m...@exonetric.com wrote:
10.0 - Nov 2013
I think 10.0 should be released based on feature-readiness and not on
some arbitrary date...
--
Igor M.
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
On 18 January 2012 22:53, Mark Blackman m...@exonetric.com wrote:
On 18 Jan 2012, at 22:50, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
On 18 January 2012 22:31, Mark Blackman m...@exonetric.com wrote:
10.0 - Nov 2013
I think 10.0 should be released based on feature-readiness and not on
some arbitrary date
On 19 January 2012 00:57, Dieter BSD dieter...@engineer.com wrote:
Idea 2: Give it status. Set up a web page with PR fixing stats
name/handle..total PRs fixed...fixed in last 12 months...average fixed/year
Sheldon..150...9072
On 17 January 2012 13:44, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 17/01/2012 07:32, Atom Smasher wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2012, richo wrote:
This would be a different argument if all the devs were paid a salary.
==
what percentage of linux devs are on salary to develop linux?
On 17 January 2012 14:20, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 17 January 2012 14:49, Igor Mozolevsky i...@hybrid-lab.co.uk wrote:
On 17 January 2012 13:44, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 17/01/2012 07:32, Atom Smasher wrote:
what percentage of linux devs are on salary to develop
On 17 January 2012 16:48, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Igor Mozolevsky i...@hybrid-lab.co.uk
wrote:
Actually, I don't think it's cash that's the problem. I think it is
more to do with the lack of common goal: the way that releases are
perceived
On 17 January 2012 15:39, Mark Felder f...@feld.me wrote:
FreeBSD is increasingly becoming a third world citizen thanks to
virtualization efforts being focused on Linux, so I feel that more
frequent releases won't help as many people as you think.
I would guess that for folks like VMWare, the
On 17 January 2012 23:01, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
If you'd like to see:
... more frequent releases? then please step up and help with all the
infrastructure needed to roll out test releases, including building
_all_ the ports. A lot of people keep forgetting that a release is
On 18 January 2012 00:00, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote:
Just a note: the next best thing you can to _not_ have a patch committed is to
just open a PR and stop at that. The best thing being not sharing the patch
at
all :-)
[snip]
Some things that help:
- send a problem description
On 18 January 2012 01:11, Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote:
It takes time to review and test patches. There are a lot of people
that think it only takes 30 seconds to download the patch, apply, and
commit. This is just not true.
I fully understand that and it is not what I was saying,
On 17 January 2012 02:25, richo ri...@psych0tik.net wrote:
On 17/01/12 02:21 +, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:
On 17 January 2012 01:02, richo ri...@psych0tik.net wrote:
This would be a different argument if all the devs were paid a salary.
Isn't this a bit of a cyclical argument: developers
On 17 January 2012 01:02, richo ri...@psych0tik.net wrote:
This would be a different argument if all the devs were paid a salary.
Isn't this a bit of a cyclical argument: developers don't work because
they are not paid a salary, the end-user base shrinks, BigCo doesn't
want to pay for someone
/usr/src : zfs with compression enabled
/usr/src : 386.3MB/s
Do I understand it well? It seems that zfs with compression enabled on
/usr/src with 8KB block size and 16 threads performs 386.3MB/s which
is about 6 times better than debian5? I am thinking about this image
On 5 June 2010 00:58, Adam PAPAI w...@wooh.hu wrote:
How can I tune my disk to make it faster? Is it possible? What is the
reason of the really slow I/O with more than 4 threads? What do you
recommend me to do? Why is it damn slow with 8K blocksize?
Does linux still have async disk writes by
2010/1/27 Oliver Fromme o...@lurza.secnetix.de:
Second, you should make sure that ATA_STANDBY_IMMEDIATE is
only used when a poweroff is requested, but not in other
cases. Of course, ATA_FLUSHCACHE should *always* be sent.
Would SLEEP not be a better option than STANBY IMMEDIATE, as SLEEP
2010/1/26 Alexander Best alexbes...@wwu.de:
attached you'll find a very simple patch which issues ATA_STANDBY_IMMEDIATE
instead of ATA_FLUSHCACHE during hdd spin down.
Hold on, does STANDBY IMMEDIATE not abort the previous command within
some short timeframe? What if there are pending writes?
2010/1/27 Igor Mozolevsky i...@hybrid-lab.co.uk:
Hold on, does STANDBY IMMEDIATE not abort the previous command within
some short timeframe? What if there are pending writes?
Nope, ignore me...
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http
2009/7/22 Kostik Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
I believe that the nearest action that is quite reasonable and
profitable by its own merit is divorcing base compiler and compiler used
to build ports. Even if this means that we would only have different
versions of gcc.
On a similar note, has
2009/7/4 Giorgos Keramidas keram...@ceid.upatras.gr:
[snip]
s/0x%/%#.2hh/g
--
Igor
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
2009/6/30 Alexander Best alexbes...@math.uni-muenster.de:
that works, but i really want to have a pretty output to stdout. i guess i
have to stick with printf and use `for (i=0; i sizeof(XXX); i++)` for each
array in the struct. just thought i could avoid it.
btw. `./my-program | hexdump`
2009/6/30 Alexander Best alexbes...@math.uni-muenster.de:
thanks. but that simply dumps the contents of the struct to stdout. but since
most of the struct's contents aren't ascii the output isn't really of much
use.
How about ./your-program | hexdump ?
--
Igor
2009/6/30 Alexander Best alexbes...@math.uni-muenster.de:
should be stdout.
struct Header *hdr = rom;
int new_fd = open(/dev/stdout, O_RDWR);
printf(SIZE: %d\n,sizeof(*hdr));
write(new_fd, hdr, sizeof(*hdr));
close(new_fd);
You should really be checking what open returns, opening
2008/10/31 Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
... If that's what you were referring to, then possibly making O_NOATIME
only to root would be a suitable compromise.
And no systems are compromised with rootkits?..
Igor :-)
___
2008/9/30 Oliver Fromme [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Oliver Fromme [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pierre Riteau wrote:
Because the 3-way handshake ensures that the source address is
not being
spoofed, more aggressive action can be taken based on these
2008/9/6 Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-On [20080906 20:41], Alexander Sizov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Sep 5 00:34:38 test kernel: seScyonncdisn)g fdoirs kssy,s tvenmo
dperso creesmsa i`nsiynngc.e.r.' to3 stop...0 0 done
On my AMD64 box (using 32 bit FreeBSD due to the
2008/7/3 Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
1. It should be library-based and therefore be capable of supporting at
least a few different UIs (see above).
2. At least one of those UIs should be functional over a standard serial
console.
3. It should be scriptable.
I was thinking of doing it,
On 17/03/2008, Murray Stokely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The FreeBSD Project was again accepted as a mentoring organization for
the Google Summer of Code. The student application period will begin
next week so if you have any ideas for great student projects, please
send them to [EMAIL
On 24/02/2008, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
IMO the possibility of such attack is so remote that it doesn't really
warrant any special attention, it's just something that should be kept
in mind when writing secure crypto stuff
On 25/02/2008, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In response to Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Crypto is merely a way of obfuscating data, and we all know the truth
about security by obscurity, right?
I don't think you correctly understand the concept of security through
On 24/02/2008, Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Igor Mozolevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23/02/2008, Brooks Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should actually read the paper. :) They successfully defeat both
of these type of protections by using canned air to chill
On 23/02/2008, Brooks Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should actually read the paper. :) They successfully defeat both
of these type of protections by using canned air to chill the ram and
transplanting it into another machine.
Easy to get around this attack - store the key on a usb
42 matches
Mail list logo
