* Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2005-08-13 02:35
> besides a small bugfix, this patchset adds support for dynamic number
> of groups to netlink. To support an arbitary number of groups a couple
> of changes had to me made, I'll explain them below. The patches are
> only sent to netdev to avoi
* Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2005-08-13 02:36
> [NETLINK]: Support dynamic number of multicast groups per netlink family
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> - if ((err = __netlink_create(sock, protocol) < 0))
> + nlk->groups = kmalloc(NLGRPSZ(groups), GFP_
* David S. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2005-08-13 14:10
> From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 11:32:39 +1000
>
> > I actually had a play with the fast clone stuff. However, eventually
> > I gave up because of this dilemma: I needed to either introduce an extra
> > atomic
* David S. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2005-08-13 15:20
> From: Tommy Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > First thing I'd try is to remove the ! from these two tests.
>
> Duh, thanks for catching that obvious error :-)
I guess my mind was or still is lost in the woods of Alaska.
-
To unsubscribe f
From: Tommy Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: skb->pkt_type
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 00:20:28 +0200
> David S. Miller wrote:
> > Here is the current patch. It dies on the destruction of the
> > first TCP socket, while pruning the write queue of the socket,
> > so something is very wrong
David S. Miller wrote:
Here is the current patch. It dies on the destruction of the
first TCP socket, while pruning the write queue of the socket,
so something is very wrong in the implementation, I just haven't
had a chance to fully debug it yet.
First thing I'd try is to remove the ! from th
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:45:34 +0200
> [NETFILTER] introduce and use aligned_u64 data type
Applied.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 17:46:19 +0200
> [NETFILTER] Add new iptables "connbytes" match
Applied.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/m
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 16:50:23 +0200
> So for new development, I'm now more inclined to push things sooner to
> you - even more for code that only adds new featurss. If you generally
> dislike that, please let me know.
I think this is the way to go.
-
To un
Thanks for posting this Patrick. I'll review this when I'm at
home instead of at an internet cafe up in the mountains with dodgy
wireless access :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vge
From: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 04:25:08 +0200
> I just wanted to make the patch to break compilation for
> unconverted code for the skb->stamp change and noticed that
> the patch is missing from your latest net-2.6.14 tree. Is
> this deliberate or did it get lost?
From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 11:32:39 +1000
> I actually had a play with the fast clone stuff. However, eventually
> I gave up because of this dilemma: I needed to either introduce an extra
> atomic op on the __kfree_skb path, or add bloat to the inlined kfree_skb
>
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 18:06:21 +0200
> TSO can only happen for locally-generated packets, am I right?
That is correct.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 16:51:57 +0200
> Ok, just in case Dave was waiting for my comments (which are usually
> not required since Patricks patches tend to have a higher quality than
> mine):
>
> ACK-ed-by: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I like to see ACK
From: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add new iptables ipt_connbytes match
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 03:20:06 +0200
> Harald Welte wrote:
> > Just send two incremental patches to Dave.
>
> Here they are. The first patch fixes the div64_64 function, the second
> one renames s
Harald,
Thanks a lot for the clarification. If NAT for non-locally generated
packets means no TSO possible, then we are not including all those
large base of private-addressed TSO-enabled LAN hosts from taking its
benefits. The NAT box in fact would be handling load from many local
hosts and mak
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 03:20:09PM +0530, Anand SVR wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While browsing through the code, I encountered instances in
> ipv4/netfilter where checksum related calls are made in ip_nat_core.c
> and other files. Wondering if netfilter should be made aware of tso so
> that the checksum oper
This time without the ipt_connbytes hunk:
--
- Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://netfilter.org/
"Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
architectural error that shows
The reworked version (already uses aligned_u64). Pleas apply, thanks
--
- Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://netfilter.org/
"Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
ar
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 12:09:04PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Harald Welte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:03:43 +0200
>
> > Ok, I hope everyone is fine with this patch:
>
> It is, but I did not add the connbytes patch into my tree so I can't
> use this patch as-is. Th
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 03:20:06AM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Harald Welte wrote:
> >Just send two incremental patches to Dave.
>
> Here they are. The first patch fixes the div64_64 function, the second
> one renames some constants.
Ok, just in case Dave was waiting for my comments (which a
Hi,
Against latest net-2.6.14, but should apply to other versions as well. Please
apply.
diff-tree b13ca94bb73c79cbc1b34c4261b02c3df934498a (from
c097bee59e15d4703e53b8c21d9e9ce5da9365bc)
Author: Balazs Scheidler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat Aug 13 16:24:25 2005 +0200
As discussed [
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 10:41:20AM +0200, pstaszewski wrote:
>
> ok i applied this patch and debug show:
>
> packets_out = 16, fackets_out = 5, reordering = 3, sack_ok = 0x3,
> mss_cache=1460
Doh! I got the if statement wrong in the debugging patch so instead
of printing things out when the bug
Hi,
While browsing through the code, I encountered instances in
ipv4/netfilter where checksum related calls are made in ip_nat_core.c
and other files. Wondering if netfilter should be made aware of tso so
that the checksum operation can be avoided altogether under such
circumstances since hardware
24 matches
Mail list logo
