On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 8:04 AM, chetan loke wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
>> On Apr 15, 2017, at 7:10 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>
>>> Do you think this is a kernel problem, libpcap problem, or an
>>> application problem?
>&
On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2017, at 7:10 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
>> Do you think this is a kernel problem, libpcap problem, or an
>> application problem?
>
Its clearly a kernel regression.
If you look at if_packet.h, I have explicitly called out all the cas
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:13 PM, chetan loke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Gosh. Can we also replace this BUG() into something less aggressive ?
>>>
>>>
>>> There are currently 5 of these WARN() +
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:09 PM, John Fastabend
wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, the difficulty lies in v3 requiring that the
>> timer "close" the block when the timer expires. That may not be worth
>> implementing, indeed.
>>
>
> Yep that is where I just gave up and decided it wasn't worth i
>>
>> Gosh. Can we also replace this BUG() into something less aggressive ?
>
>
> There are currently 5 of these WARN() + BUG() constructs and 1 BUG()-only
> for the 'default' TPACKET version spread all over af_packet, so probably
> makes sense to rather make all of them less aggressive.
>
>
Very
