On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 05:26 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:34 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 06:35 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > [...] > > > Then how about convincing the Debian kernel developers to accept these > > > patches, and work through any regressions that might be found and after > > > that, reporting back to us? > > > > Ben? > > > > The reason I contacted you was precisely because it went into 2.6.33.2, > > e.g. was already accepted into a -stalbe release. I didn't expect it to > > be such an issue. > > That's not likely if people spread FUD about the backlog patches! > > Dave, did you explicitly exclude these patches from 2.6.32 when you > submitted them to stable, or is it just that 5534979 "udp: use limited > socket backlog" depends on a1ab77f "ipv6: udp: Optimise multicast > reception"? The former patch doesn't look too hard to backport to > 2.6.32 (see below).
Anybody? We've currently rolled out our own 2.6.32 kernel with these fixes applied, and they indeed fix a system crash under our nfs-load. What else can I do to get these fixes into either Debians' 2.6.32 or Greg's stable 2.6.32 series? > Ben. > > From: Zhu Yi <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:01:42 +0000 > Subject: [PATCH] udp: use limited socket backlog > > [ Upstream commit 55349790d7cbf0d381873a7ece1dcafcffd4aaa9 ] > > Make udp adapt to the limited socket backlog change. > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]> > Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov <[email protected]> > Cc: "Pekka Savola (ipv6)" <[email protected]> > Cc: Patrick McHardy <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Zhu Yi <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> > [bwh: Backport to 2.6.32] Regards, Lukas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
