From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: Oops in 2.6.21-rc4, 2.6.23 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:11:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20071030141120.GA3997@ff.dom.local> References: <20071015173956.6c554387@beavis.confused.org> <20071029084232.GA2280@ff.dom.local> <20071029.014147.56411400.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: darko.koruga@siol.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mx2.go2.pl ([193.17.41.42]:42162 "EHLO poczta.o2.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754087AbXJ3OHt (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 10:07:49 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071029.014147.56411400.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 01:41:47AM -0700, David Miller wrote: ... > Actually, this was caused by a real bug in the SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD macro > definition, which Herbert Xu quickly spotted and fixed. > > Which "I hope you've found this by yourself by now". > ...Btw, of course you have to be right, and I should find this in max. 12 days yet, if I'm as smart as I hope. But as for now, I really can't see any meaningful difference between this "buggy" SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD version and 'generic' 2.6.20. There is also a tiny doubt, how this all could influence 2.6.21-rc4, which seems to be 'generic' here as well. I guess it has to be some git issue... the more so, as I can't see there this other (bisected) patch as well?! Then, of course, this could be my sight issue - but then these 12 days are definitely not enough... Cheers, Jarek P.