From: Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 17:42:20 -0700
> David> You were using an interface in an unintended way. > > There were a lot of opportunities to suggest a better way or even just > raise the alarm when IPoIB was first being reviewed. And I don't > remember anyone giving any guidance or insight into the neighbour > destructor design the three or four times Michael raised the issue of > the IPoIB crash and posted this patch for review.... If I thought your change was appropriate for 2.6.16 I would have put it into that tree back then. Instead, I did not consider it appropriate, that's why we decided to put it into 2.6.17 Nothing since then has changed the situation. > If this patch is too risky for -stable, that's fine. But let's be > clear that it _does_ fix a panic people hit in practice, and as far as > I know it doesn't break the ATM build I think it's too risky. It fixes a panic for infiniband. I think you should not have submitted such a core networking change to -stable without passing it by netdev CC:'ing me first. _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
