From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: probably bug in drr scheduler, 2.6.29-rc5 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:25:00 +0000 Message-ID: <20090227112500.GG4156@ff.dom.local> References: <20090227101634.GD4156@ff.dom.local> <20090227.024613.141114390.davem@davemloft.net> <20090227110137.GF4156@ff.dom.local> <20090227.031620.155361122.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: denys@visp.net.lb, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kaber@trash.net To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f178.google.com ([209.85.218.178]:60631 "EHLO mail-bw0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751571AbZB0LZH (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2009 06:25:07 -0500 Received: by bwz26 with SMTP id 26so974338bwz.37 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 03:25:05 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090227.031620.155361122.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 03:16:20AM -0800, David Miller wrote: ... > This bug doesn't exist in earlier releases like 2.6.28 and 2.6.27? Yes, sch_drr is 2.6.29 born. Jarek P.