From owner-freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org  Wed Aug 10 17:41:43 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CB75BB51E4
 for <freebsd-amd64@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:41:43 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CF8C18DD
 for <freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:41:43 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u7AHfg9d041948
 for <freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:41:43 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 211730] pf uses 32bit value for bandwith with altq
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:41:43 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System
X-Bugzilla-Component: kern
X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3-RELEASE
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People
X-Bugzilla-Who: kp@freebsd.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: New
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: ---
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-211730-6-dFw4B2jvBm@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-211730-6@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-211730-6@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:46:00 +0000
X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform <freebsd-amd64.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-amd64>,
 <mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-amd64/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64>,
 <mailto:freebsd-amd64-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 17:41:43 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D211730

--- Comment #6 from Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> ---
(In reply to Mahdi Mokhtari from comment #4)
The problem with the ABI is that we can't rely on user space and kernel spa=
ce
running the same code versions. If someone were to update the kernel, but n=
ot
the user space code (I don't think we support the reverse) they'd disagree
about the size of the bandwidth fields and things would break.

It'll likely be best to have two versions of the ioctl() command, one which
implements the old 32-bit behaviour (on the same ID as before!), and a new =
one
which implements the new 64-bit values.

That'd have to be supported for a bit, but hopefully it can be removed
eventually.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=