From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ye Xiaolong Subject: Re: [LKP] [net] 2ab9fb18c4: kernel BUG at include/linux/skbuff.h:1935! Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:54:16 +0800 Message-ID: <20161114055416.GD1890@yexl-desktop> References: <5828fc09.rTUEnj6qw0eDHzYL%xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <1479088020.8455.41.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <20161114021420.GC31218@yexl-desktop> <20161114031130.yjb4anou24ede4ue@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Eric Dumazet , Alexander Duyck , Willem de Bruijn , netdev , Alexei Starovoitov , Jojy Varghese , Tom Herbert , Yibin Yang , lkp@01.org, David Miller To: Fengguang Wu Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:30677 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753823AbcKNFzP (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2016 00:55:15 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161114031130.yjb4anou24ede4ue@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/14, Fengguang Wu wrote: >>>Hi guys. >>> >>>I took a look at the commit again and I do not see how this can happen. >>> >>>Are you sure patch was properly applied ? >>> >>>In particular, the following extract is obscure for me : >>> >>> >>>>https://github.com/0day-ci/linux Eric-Dumazet/net-__skb_flow_dissect-must-cap-its-return-value/20161110-080839 >>>>commit 2ab9fb18c46b91b16a0f0f329336d3be9fc32deb ("net: __skb_flow_dissect() must cap its return value") >>>> >> >>Hi, >> >>The above two lines means 0day repo setup a new branch >>"Eric-Dumazet/net-__skb_flow_dissect-must-cap-its-return-value/20161110-080839" >>which is based on net/master, then applied you patch on top of it, >>commit id is 2ab9fb18c46b91b16a0f0f329336d3be9fc32deb. > >Xiaolong, it may be more helpful to show the base tree where we apply >the patch to. And the final url: > >https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/tree/Eric-Dumazet/net-__skb_flow_dissect-must-cap-its-return-value/20161110-080839 > Ok, I'll improve the appearance to make it more clear. Thanks, Xiaolong >Thanks, >Fengguang