Hello, Herbert Xu.
On 19.04.2006 03:27 you said the following:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 01:22:56PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
I think it is deserving of some run time assertions, else these bugs
will elude us continually. Luckily there are only a few places that
would need the run time
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 10:04:53AM +0400, Boris B. Zhmurov wrote:
I confirm, finally I don't see messages in dmesg about assertions. Nice
work :)
That's great. Thanks a lot for your and everyone else's help in
tracking down.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email:
Boris B. Zhmurov wrote:
Hello, Herbert Xu.
On 19.04.2006 03:27 you said the following:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 01:22:56PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
I think it is deserving of some run time assertions, else these bugs
will elude us continually. Luckily there are only a few places that
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:32:04 +1000
Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Dave:
You're absolutely right about there being a problem with the TSO packet
trimming code. The cause of this lies in the tcp_fragment() function.
When we allocate a fragment for a completely non-linear packet the
From: Stephen Hemminger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:53:48 -0700
Please put this in the next -stable load...
I already sent it to -stable.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at
Hi Dave:
You're absolutely right about there being a problem with the TSO packet
trimming code. The cause of this lies in the tcp_fragment() function.
When we allocate a fragment for a completely non-linear packet the
truesize is calculated for a payload length of zero. This means that
Hi Herbert,
Herbert Xu wrote:
I've copied the code you used in tso_fragment which should work here.
I'm happy to see, that this got resolved and this is a nice minimalistic fix
for -stable.
But shouldn't we put this kind of hairy manipulation into some nice functions?
Driver writers were
From: Ingo Oeser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:29:59 +0200
But shouldn't we put this kind of hairy manipulation into some nice
functions? Driver writers were already confused by all that size,
len and truesize stuff, as this bug showed.
It's 2 lines and frankly it's a bit
From: Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:32:04 +1000
You're absolutely right about there being a problem with the TSO packet
trimming code. The cause of this lies in the tcp_fragment() function.
When we allocate a fragment for a completely non-linear packet the
truesize
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 01:22:56PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
I think it is deserving of some run time assertions, else these bugs
will elude us continually. Luckily there are only a few places that
would need the run time assertion checks on skb-truesize, and I'll
try to spend a few
10 matches
Mail list logo
