On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 12:43:33AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > BTW, the version I posted to you is missing the following line.
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.20.i386/drivers/xen/core/skbuff.c 2007-04-28
> > 15:30:16.0 +1000
> > +++
Herbert Xu wrote:
> BTW, the version I posted to you is missing the following line.
>
> --- linux-2.6.20.i386/drivers/xen/core/skbuff.c 2007-04-28
> 15:30:16.0 +1000
> +++ build-2.6.20.i386/drivers/xen/core/skbuff.c 2007-04-28
> 15:30:52.0 +1000
> @@ -89,6 +89,7 @@
Herbert Xu wrote:
BTW, the version I posted to you is missing the following line.
--- linux-2.6.20.i386/drivers/xen/core/skbuff.c 2007-04-28
15:30:16.0 +1000
+++ build-2.6.20.i386/drivers/xen/core/skbuff.c 2007-04-28
15:30:52.0 +1000
@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 12:43:33AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Herbert Xu wrote:
BTW, the version I posted to you is missing the following line.
--- linux-2.6.20.i386/drivers/xen/core/skbuff.c 2007-04-28
15:30:16.0 +1000
+++
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:27:21PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > They can be applied separately so you don't need the dom0 part for your
> > tree.
>
> Great, thanks.
BTW, the version I posted to you is missing the following line.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 04:27:21PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Herbert Xu wrote:
They can be applied separately so you don't need the dom0 part for your
tree.
Great, thanks.
BTW, the version I posted to you is missing the following line.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at
Herbert Xu wrote:
> They can be applied separately so you don't need the dom0 part for your
> tree.
Great, thanks.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 03:19:50PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> OK, I've been sitting on this in the hope that I'll suddenly see the
> light and work out what you're talking about - but apparently that's not
> going to happen. So, some questions:
>
>1. Does this patch change the
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Sure thing. I'll look over it soon.
>
> Actually there is one thing I'd like to see changed first up: I noticed
> that you've stripped out the checksum hack which is in the main Xen tree.
> We actually have the code in net-2.6.22 (which is also in mm) that lets
> you use
Herbert Xu wrote:
Sure thing. I'll look over it soon.
Actually there is one thing I'd like to see changed first up: I noticed
that you've stripped out the checksum hack which is in the main Xen tree.
We actually have the code in net-2.6.22 (which is also in mm) that lets
you use
On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 03:19:50PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
OK, I've been sitting on this in the hope that I'll suddenly see the
light and work out what you're talking about - but apparently that's not
going to happen. So, some questions:
1. Does this patch change the dom0 -
Herbert Xu wrote:
They can be applied separately so you don't need the dom0 part for your
tree.
Great, thanks.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:34:55PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> Could you give netfront an overall review as well? I know you're
> already pretty familiar with it, but if you could cast a fresh eye over
> it, that would be helpful.
Sure thing. I'll look over it soon.
Actually there
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Thanks Jeremy. The patch looks good.
Could you give netfront an overall review as well? I know you're
already pretty familiar with it, but if you could cast a fresh eye over
it, that would be helpful.
Thanks,
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 02:57:00PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Netfront's use of nh.raw and h.raw for storing page+offset is a bit
> hinky, and it breaks with upcoming network stack updates which reduce
> these fields to sub-pointer sizes. Fortunately, skb offers the "cb"
> field
Netfront's use of nh.raw and h.raw for storing page+offset is a bit
hinky, and it breaks with upcoming network stack updates which reduce
these fields to sub-pointer sizes. Fortunately, skb offers the "cb"
field specifically for stashing this kind of info, so use it.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy
Netfront's use of nh.raw and h.raw for storing page+offset is a bit
hinky, and it breaks with upcoming network stack updates which reduce
these fields to sub-pointer sizes. Fortunately, skb offers the cb
field specifically for stashing this kind of info, so use it.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 02:57:00PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Netfront's use of nh.raw and h.raw for storing page+offset is a bit
hinky, and it breaks with upcoming network stack updates which reduce
these fields to sub-pointer sizes. Fortunately, skb offers the cb
field specifically
Herbert Xu wrote:
Thanks Jeremy. The patch looks good.
Could you give netfront an overall review as well? I know you're
already pretty familiar with it, but if you could cast a fresh eye over
it, that would be helpful.
Thanks,
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:34:55PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
Could you give netfront an overall review as well? I know you're
already pretty familiar with it, but if you could cast a fresh eye over
it, that would be helpful.
Sure thing. I'll look over it soon.
Actually there is
20 matches
Mail list logo
