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
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 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
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,
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 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
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 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
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 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 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 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 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
13 matches
Mail list logo
