On Saturday 28 February 2015 10:58 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
>>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wr
On Saturday 28 February 2015 10:58 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
harish_kand...@mentor.com wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote
On Monday 23 February 2015 09:21 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
> On 2015-02-23 15:30, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> This could be particularly bad if in a kernel version an option was
>> tristate and in a new version it changed to boolean. I'm not sure if
>> this is common to happen in kernel. Any code
On Monday 23 February 2015 09:21 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
On 2015-02-23 15:30, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
This could be particularly bad if in a kernel version an option was
tristate and in a new version it changed to boolean. I'm not sure if
this is common to happen in kernel. Any code that did
On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
> On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
>> wrote:
>>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De M
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>> On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
>
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>>> Harrish, in your patch if you just change the "return
>>> KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN;" to "return KMOD_MODULE_C
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> wrote:
>>> Harrish, in your patch if you just change the "return
>>> KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN;" to "return KMOD_MODULE_C
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
harish_kand...@mentor.com wrote:
Harrish, in your patch if you just change the return
KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN; to return KMOD_MODULE_COMING; does it work?
Yes. Returning
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
harish_kand...@mentor.com wrote:
Harrish, in your patch if you just change the return
KMOD_MODULE_BUILTIN; to return KMOD_MODULE_COMING; does it work?
Yes. Returning
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
harish_kand...@mentor.com wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
On Thursday 19 February 2015 07:32 PM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:13 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
harish_kand...@mentor.com wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2015 04:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:49 AM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell
>>> wrote:
>>> Yeah, I just thought (an wanted that) the attributes were being
>>> created first
On Thursday 19 February 2015 06:49 AM, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote:
Lucas De Marchi lucas.de.mar...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au
wrote:
Yeah, I just thought (an
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 09:37 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi writes:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Harish Jenny K N
>> wrote:
>>> usecase: two sd cards are being mounted in parallel at same time on
>>> dual core. example modules which are getting loaded is nls_cp437.
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 09:37 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Lucas De Marchi lucas.de.mar...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Harish Jenny K N
harish_kand...@mentor.com wrote:
usecase: two sd cards are being mounted in parallel at same time on
dual core. example modules
If that is the case , then subscriptions of netlink_sock should have been
updated after netlink_remove or netlink_release.
I don't see that happening.
On Wednesday 03 September 2014 12:22 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj
> Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:14:38
In one of our random test runs we observed the crash mentioned in the previous
mail.
After debugging we found out that the call flow of the inline and static
functions were
netlink_release
-netlink_remove
-__sk_del_bind_node
--__hlist_del
*pprev was NULL in __hlist_del
In one of our random test runs we observed the crash mentioned in the previous
mail.
After debugging we found out that the call flow of the inline and static
functions were
netlink_release
-netlink_remove
-__sk_del_bind_node
--__hlist_del
*pprev was NULL in __hlist_del
If that is the case , then subscriptions of netlink_sock should have been
updated after netlink_remove or netlink_release.
I don't see that happening.
On Wednesday 03 September 2014 12:22 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Harish Jenny Kandiga Nagaraj harish_kand...@mentor.com
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014
20 matches
Mail list logo
