From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtnetlink & address family problem Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:10:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20041207141033.GD1371@postel.suug.ch> References: <41B0A5B4.6060108@suse.cz> <20041206140214.GA749@postel.suug.ch> <1102386461.1093.26.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041207124922.GA1371@postel.suug.ch> <1102424568.1089.120.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041207131706.GB1371@postel.suug.ch> <1102425618.1089.133.camel@jzny.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Michal Ludvig , Andrew Morton , Stephen Hemminger , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Jan Kara Return-path: To: jamal Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1102425618.1089.133.camel@jzny.localdomain> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * jamal <1102425618.1089.133.camel@jzny.localdomain> 2004-12-07 08:20 > On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 08:17, Thomas Graf wrote: > > > It's not really related to the gnet_stats code. stats_lock isn't set > > in the action code when using an older iproute2. I haven't tested this > > case because it was marked as broken anyway. > > Can you ping my memory on this? Is this tc with initial support > for actions or something much older than that. I'm not sure, I'm testing with a version having no action support at all. It should be fairly easy to find the bug once I have the time to really look into it. I'm still getting interrupted all the time at the moment. All actions created via tcf_hash_create, tcf_police_locate, and tcf_act_police_locate should be fine. There must be some bogus path related to older tc versions.