2.4.
So I wonder if this hidden feature or alike should be brought to 2.4 tree
also?
- Sampsa Ranta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sampsa Ranta wrote:
>
> > The code I used to do the trick at my network was as simple as this,
> > in function arp_rcv, the problem is ip_dev_find that does know if there
> > are other devices
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sampsa Ranta wrote:
>
> > The code I used to do the trick at my network was as simple as this,
> > in function arp_rcv, the problem is ip_dev_find that does know if there
> > are other devices
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sampsa Ranta wrote:
>
> > 23:38:25.278848 > arp who-has 194.29.192.38 tell 194.29.192.10 (0:50:da:82:ae:9f)
> > 23:38:25.278988 < arp reply 194.29.192.38 is-at 0:1:2:dc:d2:64 (0:50:da:82:ae:9f
evx = ip_dev_find(tip);
+ if (addr_type == RTN_LOCAL &&
+ devx == dev) {
n = neigh_event_ns(&arp_tbl, sha, &sip, dev);
if (n) {
arp_send(ARPOP_REPLY,ETH_P_ARP,sip,dev,tip,sha,dev-&
-at 0:1:2:dc:d2:6c (0:50:da:82:ae:9f)
The second one is the valid one, but both interfaces seem to answer to the
broadcasted packet with their own ARP addresses.
This came up when I wondered why I get responses to wrong interface with
Zebra.
- Sampsa Ranta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe
nds data even when none listens.
>
> Can someone explain, and maybe do something, please? Or am I supposed to
> compile kernel all the time on my production ATM routers.
>
> Same seems to apply when I stream UDP via my 3C905C card to one of my
> routers, first I get 60Mbytes / s, then 94Mb
On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Sampsa Ranta wrote:
> >
> > After either of your patches, the result was the same, sorry.
> >
> Is apm or acpi running?
No, I tried both SMP and non-SMP version of kernel, the machine is however
single processor Athlon 900
60.512598 Mb/sec)
ttcp-t: buflen=8192, nbuf=2048, align=16384/0, port=5013 udp ->
not.for.your.eyes
ttcp-t: socket
ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in 1.428264 real seconds = 11471.268617 KB/sec
(93.972633 Mb/sec)
Thanks,
Sampsa Ranta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
el.
Thanks,
Sampsa Ranta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
Don't know where those "negative CPU cycles" come from. It's probably
a driver problem. Could be that either you're triggering scheduling of a
softirq or such, where there normally wouldn't be one (but should b
oft limits ?
Yesterday I discovered that the load I can throw out to network seems to
depend on other activities running on machine. I was able to get
throughput of 33M/s with ATM when machine was idle, while I compiled
kernel at same time, the throughput was 135M/s.
So, I suggest you try to compil
11 matches
Mail list logo
