new mbuf flag proposal

Hi all. Recently, i discovered following problem (though it was already discussed, see http://freebsd.rambler.ru/bsdmail/freebsd-ipfw_2006/msg00491.html): pfil handlers (like ipfw or pf) sometime need to create packets (like tcp rst or icmp errors). In order to avoid loops M_SKIP_FIREWALL flag

Re: bin/116643: [patch] fstat(1): add INET/INET6 socket details as in NetBSD and OpenBSD

Synopsis: [patch] fstat(1): add INET/INET6 socket details as in NetBSD and OpenBSD Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs-freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: remko Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Sep 26 06:39:25 UTC 2007 Responsible-Changed-Why: This looks like something for the -net team.

Re: Request for feedback on common data backstore in the kernel

Hans Petter Selasky wrote this message on Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 01:31 +0200: Please keep me CC'ed, hence I'm not on all these lists. In the kernel we currently have two different data backstores: struct mbuf and struct buf These two backstores serve two different device types.

if_em and if_vlan

Hi. I get Device busy when trying to change VLAN-id on a sub-if to em0: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /home/user]# ifconfig vlan100 vlan 100 vlandev em0 ifconfig: SIOCSETVLAN: Device busy [EMAIL PROTECTED] /home/user]# dmesg | grep em0 em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection Version - 6.2.9 port

Panic in rt_check

Hi, I have a machine that panics almost daily in route.c, in rt_check(). This panic has been reported by several users, including Marcel Moolenaar for a machine in freebsd.org. The problem is present in both 6-STABLE and 7-CURRENT, and apparently it manifests on SMP machines, both i386 and

Re: if_em and if_vlan

This is not an issue in my current driver base, I am having our test group do some checking since I am not aware of the specific change that fixed this, I am not sure if the CURRENT code has the problem or not, also being tested. Jack On 9/26/07, Jon Otterholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. I

Re: Request for feedback on common data backstore in the kernel

Hans Petter Selasky wrote: Hi, Please keep me CC'ed, hence I'm not on all these lists. In the kernel we currently have two different data backstores: struct mbuf and struct buf These two backstores serve two different device types. mbufs are for network devices and buf is for disk

Re: new mbuf flag proposal

Oleg Bulyzhin wrote: Hi all. Recently, i discovered following problem (though it was already discussed, see http://freebsd.rambler.ru/bsdmail/freebsd-ipfw_2006/msg00491.html): pfil handlers (like ipfw or pf) sometime need to create packets (like tcp rst or icmp errors). In order to avoid loops

Re: Request for feedback on common data backstore in the kernel

Hi Scott, The discussion has been moved to [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Please only reply there next time. On Wednesday 26 September 2007, Scott Long wrote: Hans Petter Selasky wrote: Hi, Please keep me CC'ed, hence I'm not on all these lists. In the kernel we currently have two different data

releng_6_2 pagefault

Hi, I have setup RELENG_6_2 system (also check on RELENG_6). But when packet come from net0 to net1 system do pagefault. This is 4 core Intel Xeon. debug.mpsafenet = 0. kernel builded with FAST_IPSEC support and isakmpd used for IKE exchange. net image net0 [ gif tunnel ] [ pf based router ] [

bridging ath

current i386 thinkpad t41 ifconfig_lo0=inet 127.0.0.1/8 cloned_interfaces=bridge0 ifconfig_bridge0=inet 192.168.0.3/24 addm em0 addm ath0 up ifconfig_em0=up ifconfig_ath0=ssid rgnet up defaultrouter=192.168.0.1 with ether plugged in, i can ping it. unplug ether and no ping over ath0. other