Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[IPV4\]\s+Make\s+loopback\s+idev\s+stick\s+around\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[IPV4\]\s+Make\s+loopback\s+idev\s+stick\s+around\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: " <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 20:40:01 -0800; Seems sane to me. Applied, thanks Herbert.; /archives/netdev/2005-03/msg00634.html (7,758 bytes)
2. [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 16:30:30 +1100; As it is when loopback_dev loses all of its IPv4 addresses its corresponding idev will be destroyed. Unfortunately as of last August route.c relies on the loopback idev to kill references to other i; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00151.html (8,578 bytes)
3. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 16:35:32 +1100; The same problem exists for IPv6. Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00152.html (8,617 bytes)
4. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:41:21 -0800; Both patches applied to the 2.6.12-pending tree. I wish ->notifier_call()'s value was actually checked, we could do intelligent things instead of panic()'ing when (for example) loopback's idev alloca; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00551.html (8,428 bytes)
5. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:12:45 +1100; Yes I missed the ipv6 module case. It would be very nice to be able to return errors there. Since we initiate the loopback registration from addrconf_init, perhaps we can get away for the time being; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00571.html (9,231 bytes)
6. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 20:40:01 -0800; Seems sane to me. Applied, thanks Herbert.; /archives/netdev/2005-03/msg02557.html (8,055 bytes)
7. [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 16:30:30 +1100; Hi: As it is when loopback_dev loses all of its IPv4 addresses its corresponding idev will be destroyed. Unfortunately as of last August route.c relies on the loopback idev to kill references to othe; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01171.html (8,623 bytes)
8. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 16:35:32 +1100; The same problem exists for IPv6. Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01172.html (8,722 bytes)
9. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:41:21 -0800; Both patches applied to the 2.6.12-pending tree. I wish ->notifier_call()'s value was actually checked, we could do intelligent things instead of panic()'ing when (for example) loopback's idev alloca; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01571.html (8,518 bytes)
10. Re: [IPV4] Make loopback idev stick around (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:12:45 +1100; Yes I missed the ipv6 module case. It would be very nice to be able to return errors there. Since we initiate the loopback registration from addrconf_init, perhaps we can get away for the time being; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01591.html (9,410 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]