> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 02:28:56AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 13:07 +0300, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> >> Changes in v3:
> >> Rebased on top of the net-next tree.
> >>
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> No changes in patches apart from rebases, but now by
> >> default refcount_t =
On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 02:28:56AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 13:07 +0300, Elena Reshetova wrote:
>> Changes in v3:
>> Rebased on top of the net-next tree.
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> No changes in patches apart from rebases, but now by
>> default refcount_t = atomic_t (*) and
On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 09:57 +, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> Thank you very much for the report! This is an underflow (dec/sub from
> zero) that is reported by WARNING.
> I guess it is unlikely that actual code underflows, so the most
> probable cause is that it attempted to do
> On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 13:07 +0300, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> > Changes in v3:
> > Rebased on top of the net-next tree.
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > No changes in patches apart from rebases, but now by
> > default refcount_t = atomic_t (*) and uses all atomic standard operations
> > unless
On Fri, 2017-06-30 at 13:07 +0300, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> Changes in v3:
> Rebased on top of the net-next tree.
>
> Changes in v2:
> No changes in patches apart from rebases, but now by
> default refcount_t = atomic_t (*) and uses all atomic standard operations
> unless CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL is
