Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFC\s+2\.6\.10\s+7\/22\]\s+xfrm\:\s+Allow\s+device\s+drivers\s+to\s+force\s+recalculation\s+of\s+offloads\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. rm: add a parameter to xfrm_prune_bundles() (score: 1)

Author: id S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:23:58 -0800

that really be tcp_tso_cwnd_divisor?) to 1 :) Speaking of divisor values... is zero (0) su

/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg00981.html (8,727 bytes)

2. load bundled xfrm_states for outbound xfrms (score: 1)

Author: x>

Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 00:53:36 -0500

ps you were thinking of xfrm_cfg_sem

/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg00989.html (9,426 bytes)

3. er (was: Re: do_IRQ: stack overflow: 872..) (score: 1)

Author: ller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:11:06 -0800

ak it into the pending 2.6.11 tree.

/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01137.html (8,405 bytes)

4. to struct netdevice (score: 1)

Author: low <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:48:35 -0500

xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> diff -Nru a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h -- a/include/linux/netdevice.h 2

/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00847.html (14,849 bytes)

5. Re: [RFC 2.6.10 7/22] xfrm: Allow device drivers to force recalculation of offloads (score: 1)

Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:23:58 -0800

This change looks fine, but it reminds me of something. We have to make sure there is no way for xfrm_offloads to refer to a device when it is brought down. One way to ensure that, is to make each xf

/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02471.html (8,886 bytes)

6. Re: [RFC 2.6.10 7/22] xfrm: Allow device drivers to force recalculation of offloads (score: 1)

Author: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 00:53:36 -0500

You're right, it would be a problem, and I have the oopsen to prove it. :) In patch 3 of the series, xfrm_offload_add() grabs a reference to the device, and xfrm_offload_release() releases it when th

/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02479.html (9,606 bytes)

7. Re: [RFC 2.6.10 7/22] xfrm: Allow device drivers to force recalculation of offloads (score: 1)

Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:11:06 -0800

Perfect.

/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02627.html (8,612 bytes)

8. [RFC 2.6.10 7/22] xfrm: Allow device drivers to force recalculation of offloads (score: 1)

Author: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 03:48:35 -0500

Signed-off-by: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: David Dillow <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01798.html (14,874 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]