> "Chris" == Chris Leech writes:
Chris> With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
Chris> extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that
Chris> fc_exch_find is called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of a new
Chris> exchange if we are the
On 10/25/2016 07:51 PM, Chris Leech wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:37:59PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> On 10/21/2016 11:10 PM, Chris Leech wrote:
>>> With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
>>> extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:37:59PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 10/21/2016 11:10 PM, Chris Leech wrote:
> >With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
> >extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find is
> >called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of
On 10/21/2016 11:10 PM, Chris Leech wrote:
With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find is
called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of a new exchange if we are the
responder.
It doesn't come up with the
On Fri, 2016-10-21 at 14:10 -0700, Chris Leech wrote:
> With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
> extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find is
> called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of a new exchange if we are the
> responder.
>
> It doesn't
With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find is
called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of a new exchange if we are the
responder.
It doesn't come up with the initiator much, but that's basically every
6 matches
Mail list logo