From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: e100 problems in .23rc8 ? Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:04:31 -0700 Message-ID: <470FA91F.1080302@intel.com> References: <46FAA083.9020604@intel.com> <20071011003638.GA27174@redhat.com> <20071011012520.GA13160@gondor.apana.org.au> <470E4AFA.60507@intel.com> <20071011172551.GA21339@redhat.com> <7DCDA0F058071B49AED9D3D7886C41BE0A43AD1D@muon.jnpr.net> <20071012153550.GB28708@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Mack , Dave Jones , netdev@vger.kernel.org, esandeen@redhat.com To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:53684 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932942AbXJLRIS (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:08:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20071012153550.GB28708@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 07:54:33AM -0700, David Mack wrote: >> Still no joy here. See attached capture. What's really weird is that it >> shows *two* kernel panics, one in e100_poll and one in _list_add. > > Yes that's the symptom one would expect from that bug. We really > need to apply the same fix that was done for e1000. I feared that. its not the same as that commit that floated around in this thread and involves some reorganization in the init/probe code, so it's a bit more involved than just a few lines. I'll need a little bit of time to generate this fix. Auke