On 28/11/22(Mon) 15:04, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2022 17:33:26 +0100
> > From: Martin Pieuchot
> >
> > On 23/11/22(Wed) 16:34, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2022 10:52:32 +0100
> > > > From: Martin Pieuchot
> > > >
> > > > On 22/11/22(Tue) 23:40, Mark Kettenis
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:40:40PM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:18:24PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 06:02:56PM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 05:14:48PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 04:50
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:55:02AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:40:40PM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:18:24PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 06:02:56PM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 05:14
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 11:16:25AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:55:02AM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:40:40PM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 07:18:24PM +0100, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 06:02
On 28.11.2022. 17:07, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote:
> diff below should avoid panic above (and similar panics in pfsync_q_del().
> It also prints some 'error' system message buffer (a.k.a. dmesg)
>
> We panic because we attempt to remove state from psync queue which is
> already empty
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 03:39:54PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> Could this be merged with the following non "Mechanical move" diff?
Here's a rebased and cleaned up diff.
Feedback? Objection? OK?
---
Neighbour Discovery information is protected by the net lock, as
documented in nd6.h struct
The diff below adds some newish AMD elements to pcidevs. Here's the diff of
them on my MSI board:
-pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 vendor "AMD", unknown product 0x14d8 rev 0x00
-vendor "AMD", unknown product 0x14d9 (class system subclass IOMMU, rev 0x00)
at pci0 dev 0 function 2 not configured
On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 08:38:02PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> Subj.
>
> At sockets layer we touch only per-socket data, which is solock()
> protected().
>
> At protocol layer, unix(4) and key management sockets have no
> (*pr_ctloutput)() handlers. route_ctloutput() touches only per socket
I like to have current "error =" notation for both mrt6_ioctl()
and in6_ioctl() within in6_control().
Also, `data’ passed to in6_ioctl_change_ifaddr() is the local
variable, kernel lock could be pushed deep down, just before
netlock.
> On 29 Nov 2022, at 16:35, Klemens Nanni wrote:
>
> On Wed,
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 02:25:46AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> I like to have current "error =" notation for both mrt6_ioctl()
> and in6_ioctl() within in6_control().
Alright.
> Also, `data’ passed to in6_ioctl_change_ifaddr() is the local
> variable, kernel lock could be pushed deep down,
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 02:02:03AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 08:38:02PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > Subj.
> >
> > At sockets layer we touch only per-socket data, which is solock()
> > protected().
> >
> > At protocol layer, unix(4) and key management socket
Greg Steuck writes:
> The watched kettle never boiled. No more crashes in over two weeks
> (instead of two in the first week). I tried a loop of alternating iperf3
> tcp and udp to no ill effect. I still see the growth in the metrics I
> reported, yet the system remained stable.
>
> I applied the
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 10:42:36PM +, Laurence Tratt wrote:
> The diff below adds some newish AMD elements to pcidevs.
As Mike Larkin kindly pointed out off-list, I sent a diff to the generated
file. Sorry!
Laurie
diff --git sys/dev/pci/pcidevs sys/dev/pci/pcidevs
index 2a395ab413a..158a3c
13 matches
Mail list logo