From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [NET] Add missing newline for skb_*_panic Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 02:02:29 +0200 Message-ID: <42683F15.8000908@trash.net> References: <20050421050815.GA23133@gondor.apana.org.au> <42682527.3000709@trash.net> <42682718.3060601@trash.net> <20050421231437.GA10119@gondor.apana.org.au> <42683662.6060003@trash.net> <20050421235052.GA10371@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Herbert Xu In-Reply-To: <20050421235052.GA10371@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 01:25:22AM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >>BTW, Do you know if that ppp problem (Fw: [Bugme-new] [Bug 4381] New: >>When i try to start a pppoe conn., crash at net/core/skbuff.c:91) was >>already fixed? Otherwise I'd suggest that the reporter should capture >>a crash again with this patch applied. > > > Unfortunately the reporter says that he can't reproduce it. > > However, I have the suspicion that this is really the same as the > vpnc/tun bug (4279) that prompted you to make the self-modification > fix to tun.c. > > Now there is no doubt that your patch fixed a real bug in tun.c. > However, I don't think it could have caused the crash in 4279. > The reason is that the crash dump shows that the length that > was supplied to skb_put is in fact positive (0xe4 in one case > and 0xf4 in another). You're probably right, I only spent a few minutes looking for a possible reason. Unfortunately the skb_over_panic() output wasn't included in the report. > As soon as I get confirmation from the submitter that he can > still reproduce this I'll get him to try your debugging patch. Great, thanks. Regards Patrick