From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262823AbTHZVat (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:30:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262923AbTHZVat (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:30:49 -0400 Received: from [66.35.48.5] ([66.35.48.5]:55974 "HELO mail.amsonline.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262823AbTHZVao (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:30:44 -0400 Message-ID: <3F4BD073.6020105@coraccess.com> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:26:11 -0600 From: Marcus Hall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020830 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: linux-arm-2.5.59 problem connecting from win 98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I have a PXA-255 (ARM xscale) based system running the 2.5.59-rmk1-pxa1 (+ some trizeps patches) and am having a problem with connecting to the system from a windows box. Things work just fine with http/ftp/telnet from a linux box, but if I try to connect from a win 98 system, linux panics (don't really blame it..) with the error message 'kernel BUG at net/core/skbuff.c:323', which appears to say that an skbuff is being freed while still on a list. Looking at the packets being sent, it appears that the windows box is releating the SYN and ACK packets. This should be legal, but may be what is confusing the linux system. The packets I see are: windows linux SYN -> SYN -> <- SYN ACK ACK -> ACK -> data -> ... I don't know if the problem occurs on the 2nd SYN, or the 2nd ACK (or, I guess somewhere else...) I don't believe that there are any changes in the core networking in the arm/xscale patches applied to the base 2.5.59 kernel, just some tweaking of the smc9194 and cs89x0 modules. It seems unlikely that this problem would exist in the "official" kernel for long, but it also seems unlikely to be particular to the arm either... Is it a known bug (hopefully with a patch somewhere)? Thank You! Marcus Hall CorAccess Systems