Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*IFF_PROMISC\s+bug\?\s*$/: 50 ]

Total 50 documents matching your query.

1. IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:57:09 -0500
When I run tcpdump, /sbin/ip shows PROMISC, but /sbin/ifconfig does not. This is on recent RedHat and MDK boxes, at least. Alan Cox also noted that "ifconfig eth0 promisc" causes /sbin/ifconfig to s
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00031.html (8,216 bytes)

2. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:43:08 -0800 (PST)
When I run tcpdump, /sbin/ip shows PROMISC, but /sbin/ifconfig does not. What net driver? (hint hint)
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00032.html (8,141 bytes)

3. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 23:54:54 -0500
All that I've tested so far... sis900, tulip, eepro100, via-rhine immediately. Dunno what Alan Cox is using. tcpdump -does- work, and dmesg -does- contain '...entered promisc' and '...exited promisc'
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00033.html (9,029 bytes)

4. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:58:09 -0800 (PST)
Can you trace the value of dev->gflags for me through all of these actions? It should contain IFF_PROMISC when set by this bit of code: if ((flags^dev->gflags)&IFF_ALLMULTI) { int inc = (flags&IFF_AL
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00034.html (9,260 bytes)

5. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 07:19:33 +0100
David, it is not a bug, but more a FAQ. Newer libpcap uses the PACKET_ADD_MEMBERSHIP to PACKET_MR_PROMISC socket options. They have an reference count instead of the old broken non ref counted bit. p
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00035.html (9,778 bytes)

6. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:22:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 07:19:33 +0100 Turning on/off the flag virtually when the reference count is >0 would break compatibility so it is not done. Hmmm, I'm surprised t
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00036.html (9,002 bytes)

7. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 01:30:47 -0500
Net stack should not call net driver to enable promisc when it is already enabled, or disable promisc when it is already disabled, agreed? Further, we have a lock guaranteeing that dev->set_multicast
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00037.html (10,831 bytes)

8. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:39:29 -0800 (PST)
What if you have a "promisc" count of 4, and SIOCSIFFLAGS asks to turn IFF_PROMISC off? There is no logical way to perform such an operation.
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00038.html (9,230 bytes)

9. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 07:46:04 +0100
The issue is not on the driver level interface, but on the user API. The problem is that there are two incompatible user interfaces. One is essentially a reference count (PACKET_ADD_MEMBERSHIP/PACKET
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00039.html (11,595 bytes)

10. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:47:50 -0800 (PST)
I definitely think, if there is any change, it does belong in ifconfig. In fact it should report it as "IFF_PROMISC(%d)" so that it is explicit that this is not a binary state.
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00040.html (8,727 bytes)

11. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 02:01:06 -0500
Agreed. Why must that affect SIOCGIFFLAGS reporting? This is standard interface stuff, operation 'get' returns present state, operation 'set' updates present state, if possible and allowed. Whether i
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00041.html (10,524 bytes)

12. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 23:43:25 -0800 (PST)
Why must that affect SIOCGIFFLAGS reporting? Because it is asking for a boolean and we don't have a boolean to give to it. Like I said, apps should ask for the count because that is what it is, a cou
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00042.html (9,965 bytes)

13. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 03:08:21 -0500
Wrong - NIC promisc state is binary. The semantics are that it reports the true state of the hardware. It's an implementation detail that it is reference counted. And it's perfectly logical to ask if
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00043.html (11,632 bytes)

14. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 09:09:32 +0100
2.2 behaved the same way. Only 2.0 did differently. -Andi
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00044.html (10,024 bytes)

15. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 03:14:55 -0500
Sorry, that is not what I see with my own testing, and bug reports. Under 2.2, IFF_PROMISC flag appears and disappears correctly in /sbin/ifconfig. Under 2.4, it does not. I did not test 2.0. This be
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00045.html (10,576 bytes)

16. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:17:36 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 03:08:21 -0500 That little weird thing called binary compatibility. It is possible to support IFF_PROMISC until the end of time, be
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00046.html (9,708 bytes)

17. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:18:46 -0800 (PST)
2.2 behaved the same way. Only 2.0 did differently. Keep this in mind Jeff, in any arguments you make. This didn't happen yesterday, or even 2 years ago, it happened 5 years ago.
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00047.html (9,510 bytes)

18. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:19:48 -0800 (PST)
Go look at the code Jeff, the logic is identical. Something else in your 2.2.x setup is making libpcap not use the counter promisc setting.
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00048.html (9,637 bytes)

19. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 09:22:40 +0100
Did you use the same tcpdump/libpcap in 2.2 and 2.4 ? -Andi
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00049.html (10,799 bytes)

20. Re: IFF_PROMISC bug? (score: 1)
Author: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 03:33:41 -0500
Yes. To separate out other bug reports and mentions, here is my own test environment: 2.2.20 MDK kernel, or 2.2.21-pre2 custom kernel, or 2.4.18-preX MDK kernel, or 2.4.18-preX custom kernel net-tool
/archives/netdev/2002-02/msg00050.html (10,649 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu