devik wrote:
Hi,
try attached fix please (it duplicates last one too so that
you might get a reject).
Thanks, but now the rb_tree may become empty and this causes an oops in
htb_lookup_leaf() (tree-rb_node == NULL). I think the kernel crashes in
"while ((*sp->pptr)->rb_left)". Catching that case
Hi,
try attached fix please (it duplicates last one too so that
you might get a reject).
---
Martin Devera aka devik
Linux kernel QoS/HTB maintainer
http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Wilfried Weissmann wrote:
> devik wrote:
> >>>If you read comme
Yes I agree with you regarding zero queue size. I plan
to make patch similar to your proposal. I hope it will
be today.
---
Martin Devera aka devik
Linux kernel QoS/HTB maintainer
http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > devik
> devik wrote:
> >>>If you read comment above htb_dequeue_tree, it should be called
> >>>only when it is sure that there are packets inside of the level/prio.
> >>>It is known by other HTB mechanism (per-level activity lists).
> >>>
> >>>Thus the bugtrap is to catch case where class was inserted
>
devik wrote:
If you read comment above htb_dequeue_tree, it should be called
only when it is sure that there are packets inside of the level/prio.
It is known by other HTB mechanism (per-level activity lists).
Thus the bugtrap is to catch case where class was inserted
into activity list because it
> > If you read comment above htb_dequeue_tree, it should be called
> > only when it is sure that there are packets inside of the level/prio.
> > It is known by other HTB mechanism (per-level activity lists).
> >
> > Thus the bugtrap is to catch case where class was inserted
> > into activity list
devik wrote:
If you read comment above htb_dequeue_tree, it should be called
only when it is sure that there are packets inside of the level/prio.
It is known by other HTB mechanism (per-level activity lists).
Thus the bugtrap is to catch case where class was inserted
into activity list because it
If you read comment above htb_dequeue_tree, it should be called
only when it is sure that there are packets inside of the level/prio.
It is known by other HTB mechanism (per-level activity lists).
Thus the bugtrap is to catch case where class was inserted
into activity list because it had packets
Hello,
I think the BUG_TRAP() in the htb_dequeue_tree() is wrong. First it
checks if the class pointer "cl" is NULL, which is obviously right. But
I do not understand why we also check whenever the queue length of the
leaf queue is zero "cl->un.leaf.q->q.qlen". I would have put that in the
exp
