search for: ports

...b, > /* manage mstb port lists with mgr lock - take a reference > for this list */ > if (created) { > - mutex_lock(&mstb->mgr->lock); > + mutex_lock(&mgr->lock); > drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port(port); > list_add(&port->next, &mstb->ports); > - mutex_unlock(&mstb->mgr->lock); > + mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); > } > > if (old_ddps != port->ddps) { > if (port->ddps) { > if (!port->input) { > - drm_dp_send_enum_path_resources(mstb->mgr, > - mstb, port); > +...

I have about 20+ phones on a server, all set for registry expiry 1 min. But only this one, with 2 accounts, keeps re-registerting itself. All the time this is what I see on asterisk CLI and it is kind of annoying. What only this phone does this and no other. Its on a remote location. All phones are Grandstream GXP-2000. -- Registered SIP '502' at 64.101.221.250 port 18639 expires 60

Hai, If you use that or the AD, then its incomplete, imo. Your missing ldaps (636) and the GC (ssl) 3268/3269) ports and maybe NTP (123/tcp) if installed. Maybe you dont need them, just an observation. Greetz, Louis > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Jeff > Sadowski via samba > Verzonden: dinsdag 13 februari 2018 16:05 > Aan: Ma...

..._port(struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb, /* manage mstb port lists with mgr lock - take a reference for this list */ if (created) { - mutex_lock(&mstb->mgr->lock); + mutex_lock(&mgr->lock); drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port(port); list_add(&port->next, &mstb->ports); - mutex_unlock(&mstb->mgr->lock); + mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); } if (old_ddps != port->ddps) { if (port->ddps) { if (!port->input) { - drm_dp_send_enum_path_resources(mstb->mgr, - mstb, port); + drm_dp_send_enum_path_resources(mgr, mstb, +...

..._port(struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb, /* manage mstb port lists with mgr lock - take a reference for this list */ if (created) { - mutex_lock(&mstb->mgr->lock); + mutex_lock(&mgr->lock); drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port(port); list_add(&port->next, &mstb->ports); - mutex_unlock(&mstb->mgr->lock); + mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); } if (old_ddps != port->ddps) { if (port->ddps) { if (!port->input) { - drm_dp_send_enum_path_resources(mstb->mgr, - mstb, port); + drm_dp_send_enum_path_resources(mgr, mstb, +...

..._mst_branch *mstb) > { > + struct drm_device *dev = mgr->dev; > struct drm_dp_mst_port *port; > - struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb_child; > + > if (!mstb->link_address_sent) > drm_dp_send_link_address(mgr, mstb); > > list_for_each_entry(port, &mstb->ports, next) { > - if (port->input) > - continue; > + struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb_child = NULL; > + > + drm_modeset_lock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL); > > - if (!port->ddps) > + if (port->input || !port->ddps) { > + drm_modeset_unlo...

...lists with mgr lock - take a reference > > for this list */ > > if (created) { > > - mutex_lock(&mstb->mgr->lock); > > + mutex_lock(&mgr->lock); > > drm_dp_mst_topology_get_port(port); > > list_add(&port->next, &mstb->ports); > > - mutex_unlock(&mstb->mgr->lock); > > + mutex_unlock(&mgr->lock); > > } > > > > if (old_ddps != port->ddps) { > > if (port->ddps) { > > if (!port->input) { > > - drm_dp_send_enum_path_resources(mstb-&g...

...id drm_dp_mst_topology_put_port(struct drm_dp_mst_port *port); static int drm_dp_dpcd_write_payload(struct drm_dp_mst_topology_mgr *mgr, int id, @@ -888,7 +888,7 @@ static void drm_dp_destroy_mst_branch_device(struct kref *kref) */ list_for_each_entry_safe(port, tmp, &mstb->ports, next) { list_del(&port->next); - drm_dp_put_port(port); + drm_dp_mst_topology_put_port(port); } /* drop any tx slots msg */ @@ -911,7 +911,7 @@ static void drm_dp_destroy_mst_branch_device(struct kref *kref) kref_put(kref, drm_dp_free_mst_branch_device); } -static void drm_d...

Hey Rusty, These are the patches that rework a few bits to make hot-unplug while ports are open not crash apps (or kernels). The problem is when hot-unplug is performed when a port is open, the cdev struct is kept around by the file pointers and when the app later does a 'close', things go boom-boom. This patch series makes sure port as well as device hot-unplug is now safe...

Hey Rusty, These are the patches that rework a few bits to make hot-unplug while ports are open not crash apps (or kernels). The problem is when hot-unplug is performed when a port is open, the cdev struct is kept around by the file pointers and when the app later does a 'close', things go boom-boom. This patch series makes sure port as well as device hot-unplug is now safe...

Hello, This series fixes a few bugs and races with port unplug and the various file operations: read(), write() and close(). I started coding up an alternative locking mechanism based on the discussion earlier in this series, but some of what we already have has to remain, and the new code is sufficiently different, so I'd rather it bakes for a while, and I ensure there are no regressions

Hello, This series fixes a few bugs and races with port unplug and the various file operations: read(), write() and close(). I started coding up an alternative locking mechanism based on the discussion earlier in this series, but some of what we already have has to remain, and the new code is sufficiently different, so I'd rather it bakes for a while, and I ensure there are no regressions

...eeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When this refcount hits 0 for either of the two, they're removed from the topology state, but not immediately freed. Both ports and branch devices will reinitialize their kref once it's hit 0 before actually destroying themselves. The intended purpose behind this is so that we can avoid problems like not being able to free a remote payload that might still be active, due to us having removed all of the port/branch devic...

...simplified. > > To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: > drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When > this refcount hits 0 for either of the two, they're removed from the > topology state, but not immediately freed. Both ports and branch devices > will reinitialize their kref once it's hit 0 before actually destroying > themselves. The intended purpose behind this is so that we can avoid > problems like not being able to free a remote payload that might still > be active, due to us having removed all of t...

Hi, Are you sure? What happens if you manually telnet/socket 10.130.39.180 nsasia at web3:~$ telnet 10.130.39.180 655 Trying 10.130.39.180... Connected to 10.130.39.180. Escape character is '^]'. 0 db1 17 Connection closed by foreign host. Stopping the service and running debug I get: nsasia at web3:~$ sudo tincd -n gainplus -d5 -D tincd 1.0.33 starting, debug level 5

Yes, I am sure but added another broader rule: nsasia at db1:~$ sudo ufw allow from any port 655 proto udp same result for debug example. regards Robert >>> Rafael Wolf <rfwolf at gmail.com> 13-Jun-18 5:32 PM >>> Telnet will only do tcp not udp which tinc works on. Are you sure udp 655 is open? On Wed, Jun 13, 2018, 3:51 AM Robert Horgan <robert

...topology_mgr *mgr, struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb) { + struct drm_device *dev = mgr->dev; struct drm_dp_mst_port *port; - struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb_child; + if (!mstb->link_address_sent) drm_dp_send_link_address(mgr, mstb); list_for_each_entry(port, &mstb->ports, next) { - if (port->input) - continue; + struct drm_dp_mst_branch *mstb_child = NULL; + + drm_modeset_lock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex, NULL); - if (!port->ddps) + if (port->input || !port->ddps) { + drm_modeset_unlock(&dev->mode_config.connection_mutex)...

...best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: > > > drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When > > > this refcount hits 0 for either of the two, they're removed from the > > > topology state, but not immediately freed. Both ports and branch devices > > > will reinitialize their kref once it's hit 0 before actually destroying > > > themselves. The intended purpose behind this is so that we can avoid > > > problems like not being able to free a remote payload that might still > > > be a...

...t; > To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: > > drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When > > this refcount hits 0 for either of the two, they're removed from the > > topology state, but not immediately freed. Both ports and branch devices > > will reinitialize their kref once it's hit 0 before actually destroying > > themselves. The intended purpose behind this is so that we can avoid > > problems like not being able to free a remote payload that might still > > be active, due to us hav...

Hello, This series fixes a few bugs and races with port unplug and the various file operations: read(), write(), close() and poll(). There still might be more races lurking, but testing this series looks good to at least solve the easily-triggerable ones. I've run the virtio-serial testsuite and a few open/close/unplug tests, and haven't seen any badness. I've marked these patches