Apr 16 2018
Mar 26 2018
Mar 22 2018
Mar 21 2018
Feb 21 2018
Feb 20 2018
Feb 19 2018
Jan 30 2018
Jan 25 2018
Jan 18 2018
Jan 15 2018
Jan 4 2018
Dec 5 2017
Dec 2 2017
Nov 8 2017
Sep 19 2017
Sep 18 2017
Aug 21 2017
Aug 11 2017
Aug 1 2017
Jul 11 2017
Jul 10 2017
Mar 12 2017
Mar 9 2017
Feb 27 2017
Feb 7 2017
I have no objections if this information is proven.
I'm not sure how to check "TRIM with NCQ" for sure. fio (benchmarks/fio) could run "trim" task with I/O depth 4 with "posixaio" driver in "direct" mode without problems (with 4K-sized 4K-aligned) requests . Is it enough?
750 reports "Samsung", not "SAMSUNG".
Is there reason why for ATA "Samsung" is lower-case, while for SATL it is upper-case? Does some SATL implementation convert strings to upper case?
It's my copy'n'paste error. 750 EVO uses "Samsung" according to boot message.
Feb 2 2017
Feb 1 2017
Jan 31 2017
Jan 7 2017
Dec 1 2016
Nov 30 2016
Nov 21 2016
Nov 18 2016
Oct 6 2016
Sep 6 2016
Aug 17 2016
Aug 14 2016
Fix new opcode placement after megre.
Better merge with named states: previous variant was formally correct, but ugly and against any codestyle.
Aug 13 2016
Remove debug output, as this branch is "ok" now.
Aug 12 2016
Diff against r304005, with all conflicts resolved.
Jun 30 2016
Jun 20 2016
ok so I see the points of both of you.. hmm that doesn't sound very english.. let's try again..
I see the points both of you are making.
let's try address some of them (all mixed up):
1/ backwards compatibility. The capacity to process the opcodes generated by an old ipfw(8) when it sees 'keep-state' need to remain in place, and do the same things. We all agree with that. that compatibility doesn't really need to be in place for more that a major release..
Jun 16 2016
Look how it works:
'record-state' is last opcode (O_KEEP_STATE with F_NOT) in the rule and there is no implicit 'check-state'.
So, when packet is matched by this opcode, ipfw_install_state() will create dynamic rule with action that has this rule.
But 'defer-action' effect will be achieved because opcode has F_NOT flag. Look at the end of swich(), the 'match' variable will be set in the O_KEEP_STATE opcode, then 'match' variable will be inversed to zero due to the F_NOT flag. Now we get 'defer-action' effect and the search continues with the next rule. Now you can do NAT and etc.
After some thoughts, I think your patch can be simplified to only modify ipfw(8).
You can use F_NOT flag to distinguish record-state from keep-state. The rule with such opcode will be not prepended with O_PROBE_STATE.
So, when it will be matched it will call ipfw_install_state(), but after a state creation the rule action will not be applied due to presence of F_NOT flag.
Also 'set-limit' can be implemented in the same way.
Difference between record-state and keep-state is not about immediate action execution, but about implicit check-state. record-state could be encoded as F_NOT and keep-state, but defer-action needs kernel changes anyway
May 25 2016
Update diff to latest HEAD version.
Add example for new options to man page.