Kris Kennaway wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: >> Kris Kennaway wrote: >>> Julian Elischer wrote: >>>> At the BSDCAn devsummit we discussed how to proceed with committing >>>> Vimage to -current. >>>> >>>> the Milestones included something like: >>>> >>>> June 8 (today) Headsup.... >>>> >>>> June 15 commit changes that add macros for vnet >>>> (network module) and vinet(inet virtualisation) >>>> with macros defined in such a way to make 0 actual >>>> differences. provable by md5 etc. >>>> Documentat >>>> s/hostname/g//V_hostname/ >>>> #define V_hostname hostname >>>> 2 weeks settle time, next step prepared, tested >>>> and reviewed. >>> ... >>> >>>> diffs can be found at: >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/vimage.diff and it are usually >>>> fairly up to date. >>> >>> Did Marko fix the panic I saw back in May? I wasn't even able to >>> boot a vimage kernel yet, let alone begin testing it :) >> >> is this the ipv6 panic? >> I must admit I have not heard.. >> he was looking at it back thne and has committed stuff since then.. >> >> I use it with IPV4 quite successfully quite often. >> >> note that the first commits are pretty much quaranteed to not have >> that problem.. as they are effective NOPs >> >> >> I'll get back to you on it.. > > Yes, the panic occurs when one runs a vimage kernel on a CVS world. It's > presumably a case of incomplete validation of the input from userland. > > I'd still like someone to validate the initial commits and establish a > framework for ongoing testing, because we've seen cases recently where > things as simple as structure alignment changes can have >30% we have set asside a step to confirm this.. but initial testing has shown no impact. > performance impact, so if it's not entirely a NOP then there is still > potential for trouble. > > KrisReceived on Mon Jun 09 2008 - 16:53:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:31 UTC