Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:34:12 +0200 From: "Kristof Provost" <kp@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12 Message-ID: <A2DF53A3-FD86-427D-B1EE-508228B0F4CE@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20200414223710.GB33328@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <20200414223710.GB33328@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 15 Apr 2020, at 0:37, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: > (Please send the followup to freebsd-testing@ and note Reply-To is > set.) > > FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12 > =================================== > > Here is a summary of the FreeBSD Continuous Integration results for > the period > from 2020-04-06 to 2020-04-12. > > During this period, we have: > > * 1801 builds (94.0% (+0.4) passed, 6.0% (-0.4) failed) of buildworld > and > buildkernel (GENERIC and LINT) were executed on aarch64, amd64, > armv6, > armv7, i386, mips, mips64, powerpc, powerpc64, powerpcspe, riscv64, > sparc64 architectures for head, stable/12, stable/11 branches. > * 288 test runs (25.1% (-24.6) passed, 29.9% (+10.6) unstable, 45.1% > (+14.1) > exception) were executed on amd64, i386, riscv64 architectures for > head, > stable/12, stable/11 branches. > * 30 doc and www builds (83.3% (-1.3) passed, 16.7% (+1.3) failed) > > Test case status (on 2020-04-12 23:59): > | Branch/Architecture | Total | Pass | Fail | Skipped | > | ------------------- | --------- | ---------- | -------- | -------- | > | head/amd64 | 7744 (+4) | 7638 (+19) | 14 (+5) | 92 (-20) | > | head/i386 | 7742 (+4) | 7628 (+15) | 16 (+5) | 98 (-16) | > | 12-STABLE/amd64 | 7508 (0) | 7449 (-3) | 1 (+1) | 58 (+2) | > | 12-STABLE/i386 | 7506 (0) | 7425 (-17) | 2 (+2) | 79 (+15) | > | 11-STABLE/amd64 | 6882 (0) | 6829 (-6) | 1 (+1) | 52 (+5) | > | 11-STABLE/i386 | 6880 (0) | 6749 (-82) | 80 (+80) | 51 (+2) | > > (The statistics from experimental jobs are omitted) > > If any of the issues found by CI are in your area of interest or > expertise > please investigate the PRs listed below. > > The latest web version of this report is available at > https://hackmd.io/@FreeBSD-CI/report-20200412 and archive is available > at > https://hackmd.io/@FreeBSD-CI/ , any help is welcome. > > ## News > > * The test env now loads the required module for firewall tests. > > * New armv7 job is added (to replace armv6 one): > * FreeBSD-head-armv7-testvm > The images are available at https://artifact.ci.freebsd.org > FreeBSD-head-armv7-test is ready but needs test env update. > > ## Failing jobs > > * https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-amd64-gcc6_build/ > * See console log for the error details. > > ## Failing tests > > * https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-amd64-test/ > * local.kyua.integration.cmd_about_test.topic__authors__installed > * sys.netipsec.tunnel.empty.v4 > * sys.netipsec.tunnel.empty.v6 > * sys.netpfil.common.forward.ipf_v4 > * sys.netpfil.common.forward.ipfw_v4 > * sys.netpfil.common.forward.pf_v4 > * sys.netpfil.common.tos.ipfw_tos > * sys.netpfil.common.tos.pf_tos > * sys.netpfil.pf.forward.v4 I can’t actually reproduce this failure in my test VM, but with the ci test VM I can reproduce the problem. It’s not related to pf, because the sanity check ping we do before we set up pf already fails. Or rather pft_ping.py sends an incorrect packet, because `ping` does get the packet to go where it’s supposed to go. Scapy seems to fail to find the source IP address, so we get this: 12:12:22.152652 IP 0.0.0.0 > 198.51.100.3: ICMP echo request, id 0, seq 0, length 12 I have a vague recollection that we’ve seem this problem before, but I can’t remember what we did about it. In all likelihood most of the other netpfil tests fail for exactly the same reason. Best regards, Kristof From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Wed Apr 15 14:09:57 2020 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF8B2B7FD3; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:09:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 492PPd53FVz3PW8; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:09:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: from venus.codepro.be (venus.codepro.be [5.9.86.228]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.codepro.be", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: kp) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7A9EE14F66; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:09:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: by venus.codepro.be (Postfix, authenticated sender kp) id 20857EAAA; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 16:09:56 +0200 (CEST) From: "Kristof Provost" <kp@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, bofh@freebsd.org, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12 Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 16:09:55 +0200 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <DCC86D9B-ECF3-4393-B1C6-D76D1AE8BAC2@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <A2DF53A3-FD86-427D-B1EE-508228B0F4CE@FreeBSD.org> References: <20200414223710.GB33328@freefall.freebsd.org> <A2DF53A3-FD86-427D-B1EE-508228B0F4CE@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 14:09:57 -0000 On 15 Apr 2020, at 15:34, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 15 Apr 2020, at 0:37, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: >> (Please send the followup to freebsd-testing@ and note Reply-To is >> set.) >> >> FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12 >> =================================== >> >> Here is a summary of the FreeBSD Continuous Integration results for >> the period >> from 2020-04-06 to 2020-04-12. >> >> During this period, we have: >> >> * 1801 builds (94.0% (+0.4) passed, 6.0% (-0.4) failed) of buildworld >> and >> buildkernel (GENERIC and LINT) were executed on aarch64, amd64, >> armv6, >> armv7, i386, mips, mips64, powerpc, powerpc64, powerpcspe, riscv64, >> sparc64 architectures for head, stable/12, stable/11 branches. >> * 288 test runs (25.1% (-24.6) passed, 29.9% (+10.6) unstable, 45.1% >> (+14.1) >> exception) were executed on amd64, i386, riscv64 architectures for >> head, >> stable/12, stable/11 branches. >> * 30 doc and www builds (83.3% (-1.3) passed, 16.7% (+1.3) failed) >> >> Test case status (on 2020-04-12 23:59): >> | Branch/Architecture | Total | Pass | Fail | Skipped >> | >> | ------------------- | --------- | ---------- | -------- | -------- >> | >> | head/amd64 | 7744 (+4) | 7638 (+19) | 14 (+5) | 92 (-20) >> | >> | head/i386 | 7742 (+4) | 7628 (+15) | 16 (+5) | 98 (-16) >> | >> | 12-STABLE/amd64 | 7508 (0) | 7449 (-3) | 1 (+1) | 58 (+2) >> | >> | 12-STABLE/i386 | 7506 (0) | 7425 (-17) | 2 (+2) | 79 (+15) >> | >> | 11-STABLE/amd64 | 6882 (0) | 6829 (-6) | 1 (+1) | 52 (+5) >> | >> | 11-STABLE/i386 | 6880 (0) | 6749 (-82) | 80 (+80) | 51 (+2) >> | >> >> (The statistics from experimental jobs are omitted) >> >> If any of the issues found by CI are in your area of interest or >> expertise >> please investigate the PRs listed below. >> >> The latest web version of this report is available at >> https://hackmd.io/@FreeBSD-CI/report-20200412 and archive is >> available at >> https://hackmd.io/@FreeBSD-CI/ , any help is welcome. >> >> ## News >> >> * The test env now loads the required module for firewall tests. >> >> * New armv7 job is added (to replace armv6 one): >> * FreeBSD-head-armv7-testvm >> The images are available at https://artifact.ci.freebsd.org >> FreeBSD-head-armv7-test is ready but needs test env update. >> >> ## Failing jobs >> >> * https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-amd64-gcc6_build/ >> * See console log for the error details. >> >> ## Failing tests >> >> * https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-amd64-test/ >> * local.kyua.integration.cmd_about_test.topic__authors__installed >> * sys.netipsec.tunnel.empty.v4 >> * sys.netipsec.tunnel.empty.v6 >> * sys.netpfil.common.forward.ipf_v4 >> * sys.netpfil.common.forward.ipfw_v4 >> * sys.netpfil.common.forward.pf_v4 >> * sys.netpfil.common.tos.ipfw_tos >> * sys.netpfil.common.tos.pf_tos >> * sys.netpfil.pf.forward.v4 > I can’t actually reproduce this failure in my test VM, but with the > ci test VM I can reproduce the problem. > It’s not related to pf, because the sanity check ping we do before > we set up pf already fails. > Or rather pft_ping.py sends an incorrect packet, because `ping` does > get the packet to go where it’s supposed to go. > > Scapy seems to fail to find the source IP address, so we get this: > > 12:12:22.152652 IP 0.0.0.0 > 198.51.100.3: ICMP echo request, id 0, > seq 0, length 12 > > I have a vague recollection that we’ve seem this problem before, but > I can’t remember what we did about it. > > In all likelihood most of the other netpfil tests fail for exactly the > same reason. The problem appears to be that /usr/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/scapy/arch/unix.py is misparsing the `netstat -rnW` output. For reference, this is the output in the test VM: Routing tables Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Nhop# Mtu Netif Expire 127.0.0.1 link#2 UH 1 16384 lo0 192.0.2.0/24 link#4 U 2 1500 epair0a 192.0.2.1 link#4 UHS 1 16384 lo0 198.51.100.0/24 192.0.2.2 UGS 3 1500 epair0a Internet6: Destination Gateway Flags Nhop# Mtu Netif Expire ::/96 ::1 UGRS 4 16384 lo0 ::1 link#2 UH 1 16384 lo0 ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS 4 16384 lo0 fe80::/10 ::1 UGRS 4 16384 lo0 fe80::%lo0/64 link#2 U 3 16384 lo0 fe80::1%lo0 link#2 UHS 2 16384 lo0 fe80::%epair0a/64 link#4 U 5 1500 epair0a fe80::3d:9dff:fe7c:d70a%epair0a link#4 UHS 1 16384 lo0 fe80::%epair1a/64 link#6 U 6 1500 epair1a fe80::37:9eff:fe03:250a%epair1a link#6 UHS 1 16384 lo0 ff02::/16 ::1 UGRS 4 16384 lo0 The parsing code seems to think that the netif for the 198.51.100.0/24 route is 1500 rather than epair0a. This may be related to the difference in netstat output, because on my VM it looks like this: Routing tables Internet: Destination Gateway Flags Use Mtu Netif Expire default 172.16.2.1 UGS 319 1500 vtnet0 127.0.0.1 link#2 UH 0 16384 lo0 172.16.2.0/24 link#1 U 14 1500 vtnet0 172.16.2.2 link#1 UHS 0 16384 lo0 Internet6: Destination Gateway Flags Use Mtu Netif Expire ::/96 ::1 UGRS 0 16384 lo0 ::1 link#2 UH 0 16384 lo0 ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS 0 16384 lo0 fe80::/10 ::1 UGRS 0 16384 lo0 fe80::%vtnet0/64 link#1 U 0 1500 vtnet0 fe80::5a9c:fcff:fe02:a95e%vtnet0 link#1 UHS 0 16384 lo0 fe80::%lo0/64 link#2 U 0 16384 lo0 fe80::1%lo0 link#2 UHS 0 16384 lo0 ff02::/16 ::1 UGRS 0 16384 lo0 I suspect that this change was introduced in r359823 (Introduce nexthop objects and new routing KPI). Best regards, Kristof From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Wed Apr 15 15:28:18 2020 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5E5D2BA023; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:28:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 492R825Nhvz40DN; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:28:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: from venus.codepro.be (venus.codepro.be [5.9.86.228]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.codepro.be", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: kp) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A0EA175E8; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:28:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kp@FreeBSD.org) Received: by venus.codepro.be (Postfix, authenticated sender kp) id 35C53ED27; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:28:17 +0200 (CEST) From: "Kristof Provost" <kp@FreeBSD.org> To: "Olivier =?utf-8?q?Cochard-Labb=C3=A9?=" <olivier@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-testing@freebsd.org, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, bofh@freebsd.org, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12 Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:28:13 +0200 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671) Message-ID: <CBB8F199-5292-4AC6-90C5-53FADE0F04F7@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CA+q+Tcr-B5dzPKV-DSiDYmcueXX=AFgh6+j0G=-xJYB0XBzBpQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <20200414223710.GB33328@freefall.freebsd.org> <A2DF53A3-FD86-427D-B1EE-508228B0F4CE@FreeBSD.org> <DCC86D9B-ECF3-4393-B1C6-D76D1AE8BAC2@FreeBSD.org> <CA+q+Tcr-B5dzPKV-DSiDYmcueXX=AFgh6+j0G=-xJYB0XBzBpQ@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Embedded-HTML: [{"HTML":[362, 854], "plain":[58, 303], "uuid":"C83DB664-8363-477B-9B11-992FD4A5E8E1"}] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:28:18 -0000 On 15 Apr 2020, at 16:49, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:10 PM Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> > wrote: > >> >> The problem appears to be that >> /usr/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/scapy/arch/unix.py is >> misparsing >> the `netstat -rnW` output. >> > > Shouldn't scapy use the libxo output of netstat to mitigate this > regression > ? That would likely help, yes. I’m going to leave that decision up to the maintainer, because I’m not going to do the work :) I’m also not sure how “stable” we want the netstat output to be. Best regards, Kristof From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Wed Apr 15 17:08:14 2020 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD1E52BC45E for <freebsd-stable@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:08:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raul.munoz@custos.es) Received: from mail3.custos.es (mail3.custos.es [5.2.90.130]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492TMH1hJMz46VJ for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:08:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from raul.munoz@custos.es) Received: from plank.b2n.org (plank.b2n.org [213.37.4.13]) by mail3.custos.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 002F9125EE2 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 19:08:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.10.10.15] (4.191.94.90.dynamic.jazztel.es [90.94.191.4]) by plank.b2n.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DE293F32 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 19:08:07 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: CFT: if_bridge performance improvements To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <5E5BAA7D-8FDE-4163-997A-29D68F5FC642@FreeBSD.org> From: =?UTF-8?B?UmHDumwgTXXDsW96IC0gQ1VTVE9T?= <raul.munoz@custos.es> Autocrypt: addr=raul.munoz@custos.es; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFns2ZIBEAC7xWTucmdvscBLlryw1xv2opUqexkdusr4cR8lzRn+KOUmpDoibIK4C0In PPY157sWviEwCx24Hs+e664vwx6xD7zQ7ttVE30t+bm4iVqdxyIDMdgEbWOcTpYRjhRIGGpX BeBt+eYw+uE519bXHJZJJGcIzUU6Wk9fghx8RHMb5IEg4+9rsyCnEznE8u8AfJTgeOdA4h0h EweHjOFJdn6i+3r1KZlwFMIUFBo+q8ldHVzjPZGGSjguW62GgYMFn5uiYxpqTkKqD9FwrRlz n41QIOzE8o6jJfF/r4py1EiHwOTfvrrCNOA5cJXFrTsmCTj8dAySEThlxfSKQED0uPZVaegL 8KDvJ56oR9U6YE86fTdn713TvukVWeK58ZjgF/kQMymTjFFbe2IeG/QkxjWbcHb8EpLNXtIL HFX0+sezFnhKJrfGyq4jqWqWp8suzzhgQBNSQxkHNuQADabHJ13VH6qqIeC0UGUtUjEwxznh 51uyh0APK+7xhSc4+JKcVZcK7xkhY04wPT4x/dn2IbwCXewTMHROqo4oWP2ajN4bTOte1tot ZUbeLgPdr9iZrTSdt63lnTTbAxnXAxxBc/q8hVsiWM9SfOIkZ0kGeNA8NlrubcuXQzTJHy2h JhmLSuLfUaGZcr+F/3KtohTvshy2291/ruM8ExMUSDd3wb96fwARAQABtCxSYcO6bCBNdcOx b3ogLSBDVVNUT1MgPHJhdWwubXVub3pAY3VzdG9zLmVzPokCPwQTAQIAKQUCWezZkgIbIwUJ CWYBgAcLCQgHAwIBBhUIAgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAAAoJELKl4+9JDtBb750P/1d/rU1Ngc94 rVL2vqDEijJdFYEZbzE96MugnwCEdJ8Al/6mWbD4vaPIuuuW+TE8dMPItcUv1vq8D/wX8NSs OS5FNu7XfGpjjxOKdUpLLoiGbJC4AbhMZhvdpvWQQAk5szCzGT+nYPve7Ut6SyWtZPYwWM+K o5CNyRu838jfGhm6G8CvaLJHcrMBlA87OBkQi4tzT+NIBBp0U8vGXV8z6LlpI/EGXLgSJPnO pFn8PL6tXZ1uiI+AXVJT+emdB68InejcHgFrwoowZBLzXllGPH4pYVZ1h9pPARoPCmSlCe4x g+ELKvkogatQM4BXuzRGiYCVJDBqgFoRDDd/dnmsCb5DV0xWSlmpWPy06e9C8PwCI3NmukCh mq2ic74mAo9lKTv8VVc9czushKagVQhYPT3o6DHOCFJeoXvaQWIOprpAkcf5nz15SjeZWFqW EzF8+0LUocGLDLMaDkWBBruJuQfz8V3ktDdXkEv55sgrbf/98sGdIz3aOSrLy3Rop3m3shnM Uua1XpE6Fv+6g8owSI15k8bd0lmsq83/YYW2hN0vQWn/HR7xTwpA9fZh4stxJRJAHAJ7nQ/u SJkp2+NVOn9ZImKqegqqmn+amnkRsSunM1fe/i2GVsgKzkOlyDiLotUk8JU6t741kIJscGfW 8y1uC2Cf7T1tHdQsG4Hq1+C/uQINBFns2ZIBEACv+REqRGM1e6CuNil4Kim3Bi5RTXXx2/JJ dCC5W0ZsEoynoQ31RJ+3nu9OGDGzmEL+2fMVxvKiomXnwq6xZmhb6HFw03e/lOfYEEMm1hjj 23Dw9gNO3Dy5j1o3vzOWPOQwZpsE2vG0XE3ZfZ+Rg1b3SIe1R7w0nnzDAjznpYuG6WEYGFr9 r7IDouLqgBeR1i4B4M+7E8FLql06pyxF4plcJ1KSf++SNZf0arFuLzGZh9aA6L4OQ3eIqBg0 VqId8GiO6cz1t68dpOuwlt/HEcA3tCL15IIhKxQyWAU3S4yM/KBSXXGW2OI+EebFrBxYXySA IByYogpq795uiZ6gBDtQDvx1A8WHMy/7nDnXwJ9XTKzpjIFjKH0Gi/IpvxD1Aci/JbCzB76w iTA4Hbdw0iiZFUN3Wby5eVvkOBA5G+uaLJH10nyIZAe1IszaCxK+3sad6bVd2FsD7qmVHovq iLrjEa+p36kZB/Aeqm+Xwnwss32cOT3GZ6Cgs3ZYBwLJcPo+hhV9JXn7j8nt4tfJr5wm/HDN 4LgUKhUxTWrTS+iTbMtQ9NQdY4QrnB8Qa5E9mEeuZgorZCIrQm1D6MaoEX6fJ8yTru82EavX 9geX58VlFNcK32Ys1Ox0gsg6bX3CRRdAX42X4byuGGkkFwANULSCtepqbm9HO7FbGjkzNtO/ TQARAQABiQIlBBgBAgAPBQJZ7NmSAhsMBQkJZgGAAAoJELKl4+9JDtBbHaYP+wXvUGqFdxea O3Ec2WAFDzSS7EnLWAxrEHkKCIpVKYQ0TlYTd9HS2aGZ0oVJA3vNezJ3j8yusylNO9wWWIdX JQ5hrgzvEYzvb1hpo65CUsK954scz8lmh+Wh2bx728PssQsbL2gCiUJsLD6IDm9Q7374Ztsb sd1Qg+G7TmU2VQrVMo7eA3hGeNCcmiZH3zxHF8L2q1IEbo11/GaDzg9E53/lkd2+gizSD2PG OabRmIRAY7pUDjn54trQy/5fxNq0idyUUZYe6UbhE7UhpWAEdnU2Hp8bVyeJDMM6HiV7Apqg SuGcmGMYfBlNd+itjJk4MFYoIij+UiryCHfWwO8+bELyffDgHEcoVsgbL7Nn6TXoH6QjuMD2 cjGXoKplCV5jxTQJAd5/vnczlTbDA30UOwcje02r4mMh3vLaYeLNJ0Z8RCh09o7IeGskmwy4 849V5LoX3/TRKDnCf+rK7v08SEhb5QeUZ2GUwyEEby67TEmKE5LmQRj1gPnrH3Wlx2BkS/pS Y3k2cGEtoSYF3gUIec2VvzG52VSMJIOZZDcgscwvubJdRdvNPhGApWPgT8ZDfeafgJz/tRg/ hj6Zeln2xKBxgVKY/dJJouCJZdTOE6lB9vRJyCveVSi+uDu3G8idTON5cRLEy/acpBE8n0Ve noPvPYKoN8z5Hsw8DRyWVkxU Message-ID: <5205f036-eb96-d1ea-e0b8-d79876855fc3@custos.es> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 19:08:07 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5E5BAA7D-8FDE-4163-997A-29D68F5FC642@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 492TMH1hJMz46VJ X-Spamd-Bar: ----- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.60 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[custos.es:s=dkim]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:5.2.90.130]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-stable@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[custos.es]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[custos.es:+]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[130.90.2.5.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; IP_SCORE(-3.20)[ip: (-9.23), ipnet: 5.2.88.0/21(-4.61), asn: 198432(-2.18), country: ES(0.04)]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[13.4.37.213.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11,4.191.94.90.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:198432, ipnet:5.2.88.0/21, country:ES]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:08:15 -0000 El 14/4/20 a las 11:53, Kristof Provost escribió: > Patches for stable/12: https://people.freebsd.org/~kp/if_bridge/stable_12/ Bridges and taps here, r359859 with your if_bridge patches, happily running for more than two days ;). Regards, Raúl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A2DF53A3-FD86-427D-B1EE-508228B0F4CE>