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: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 09:39:15 +0100 Message-ID: <20071031083915.GA1814@ff.dom.local> References: <20071015173956.6c554387@beavis.confused.org> <20071029084232.GA2280@ff.dom.local> <20071029.014147.56411400.davem@davemloft.net> <20071030141120.GA3997@ff.dom.local> 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 mx10.go2.pl ([193.17.41.74]:44513 "EHLO poczta.o2.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752638AbXJaIfv (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:35:51 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071030141120.GA3997@ff.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 03:11:20PM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > 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. OK. At last I've found "by myself", what you seemed to suggest with such a great subtlety... So, there was this another, bugzilla thread... And, accidentally of course, I could have been not so 100% wrong, as expected?! Regards, Jarek P.