Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*take\s+2\-2\s+WAS\(Re\:\s+PATCH\:\s+IPSEC\s+xfrm\s+events\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*take\s+2\-2\s+WAS\(Re\:\s+PATCH\:\s+IPSEC\s+xfrm\s+events\s*$/: 32 ]

Total 32 documents matching your query.

1. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 07:38:26 -0400; Ok, heres an update. cheers, jamal Attachment: ipsec-event-take2-2 Description: Text document; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00151.html (11,913 bytes)
2. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 22:16:41 +1000; Hi Jamal: Great! White space comments only this time, almost :) No need for these prototypes since they're already in xfrm.h. How about letting these guys stay where they are? The move was necessary; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00154.html (15,045 bytes)
3. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 08:51:37 -0400; Good catch. Changed - dont see what the harm was as they were in that patch though. [..] [..] There was really not even a need for that hold given the likelihood of anything like this happening. Any; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00157.html (13,973 bytes)
4. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 23:02:24 +1000; Please see below. All I wanted was to leave these lines as is so that they didn't appear in the patch at all (except as conext) :) When reviewing patches the most annoying thing is to see things move; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00161.html (12,947 bytes)
5. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 09:16:55 -0400; Ok, fair enough. It annoys me too when i review patches ;-> So i will fix this before final. Goody - now we can have Masahide run his full test. cheers, jamal; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00163.html (12,410 bytes)
6. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 07:31:49 +1000; Just one more thing, can you please remove the _bh's that you added to the read_lock for xfrm_km_list? It turns out that they're not necessary since the write_lock()'s are only held in process contex; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00189.html (12,083 bytes)
7. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 18:20:17 -0400; Doesnt the policy notification one need it at least ? I thought it is entered at interupt context on packet path, no? cheers, jamal; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00191.html (12,220 bytes)
8. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 15:25:06 -0700; If you only take write_lock() from process context, only the write_lock()'s need BH disabling. read_lock() takers can then nest arbitrarily, BH or not.; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00192.html (12,249 bytes)
9. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 18:42:55 -0400; Ok, never mind - Ive made the change. As soon as Masahide tests i will post the final patch. cheers, jamal; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00193.html (12,134 bytes)
10. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:35:47 +0900; Hello Jamal, I've tested normal cases below with the latest patch and it works fine. I think you can go ahead. tested cases: o netlink (using iproute2 "ip xfrm monitor" to confirm it) - add/del/flush; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00208.html (12,603 bytes)
11. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 05 Apr 2005 06:18:22 -0400; [..] Thanks a lot Masahide! Ok, heres the patch i will shoot to Dave if no further comments. cheers, jamal Attachment: ipsec-event-take2-5 Description: Text document; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00211.html (13,042 bytes)
12. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:22:39 +1000; Thanks for your great work Jamal. Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00212.html (11,812 bytes)
13. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 05 Apr 2005 06:35:15 -0400; Well, thanks to you for the shepherding and to Masahide-san for the testing and bugs found. cheers, jamal; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00214.html (11,695 bytes)
14. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 05 Apr 2005 07:58:23 -0400; I have a feeling that Dave is not following this thread. All along we have been testing against 2.6.11.6; I just tested against -rc2 and found the patch applies with some fuzz. I fixed that as well a; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00222.html (11,889 bytes)
15. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 10:46:41 -0700; Believe it or not I have been :-); /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00244.html (11,605 bytes)
16. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 05 Apr 2005 14:05:55 -0400; Impressive ;-> After the 10th email it seemed to me only Herbert and myself would still be reading this ;-> Did you see the bit about Elvis? ;-> cheers, jamal; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg00246.html (12,373 bytes)
17. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 07:38:26 -0400; Herbert! Ok, heres an update. cheers, jamal Attachment: ipsec-event-take2-2 Description: Text document; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01287.html (12,287 bytes)
18. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 22:16:41 +1000; Hi Jamal: Great! White space comments only this time, almost :) No need for these prototypes since they're already in xfrm.h. How about letting these guys stay where they are? The move was necessary; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01290.html (15,438 bytes)
19. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: 04 Apr 2005 08:51:37 -0400; Herbert, Good catch. Changed - dont see what the harm was as they were in that patch though. [..] [..] There was really not even a need for that hold given the likelihood of anything like this happen; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01293.html (14,348 bytes)
20. Re: take 2-2 WAS(Re: PATCH: IPSEC xfrm events (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 23:02:24 +1000; Please see below. All I wanted was to leave these lines as is so that they didn't appear in the patch at all (except as conext) :) When reviewing patches the most annoying thing is to see things move; /archives/netdev/2005-04/msg01297.html (13,341 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]