rceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> ___
> Kgdb-bug
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 20:38 -0700, Piet Delaney wrote:
I was right, at least for 2.6.12, when we free the
socket the timer should have list poison in them.
retransmit_timer = {
entry = {
next = 0x100100,
prev = 0x200200
},
expires = 44563,
lock = {
slock = 1
if any
of you have some thought on this, it might save me some time
trying to understanding it.
-piet
--
Piet Delaney
BlueLane Teck
W: (408) 200-5256; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
H: (408) 243-8872; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(gdb) print *second_saved_tcp_sk
$4 = {
inet = {
sk = {
__sk_common = {
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 18:33 -0700, Piet Delaney wrote:
> I came across your Sept 2005 LKML and NetDev posting:
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/152989/
>
> and was wondering what's been going on with this
> since your posting. Looks like an interesting
> patch
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 17:31 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Piet Delaney wrote:
> > I wonder if Microsoft is providing the "big challenge" to porting the
> > same GUI to linux. The world really doesn't need yet another Java
> > language. Gosling is a Genius, I studi
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 16:04 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Piet Delaney wrote:
> > Do any of you use tools other than ANVL for RFC compliance while
> > hacking to the tcp code?
> >
> > In the unlikely event that there isn't an alternate; is there any
> > interes
developers
would like to port the code to linux.
-piet
--
Piet Delaney
BlueLane Teck
W: (408) 200-5256; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
H: (408) 243-8872; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majord
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Friday 21 April 2006 07:59, Tom Young wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 22:26 -0700, Piet Delaney wrote:
> > > I'm upgrading our 2.6.12 kernel to 2.6.13, which includes significant
> > > congestion avoidance c
I'm upgrading our 2.6.12 kernel to 2.6.13, which includes significant
congestion avoidance code additions and changes. I was wondering if
there are any tools folks can recommend for testing the kernel to make
sure the congestion avoidance code is operating correctly. For
example the displaying of
