On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 15:53 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Arjan, did you convince yourself whether or not this patch actually
> resolves the problem at hand? Applying it makes sense to me either
> way, but it would be nice to believe
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:53:13PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any objection to Herbert's patch? It seems
> appropriate to me.
I have no objections!
:)
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondo
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:22:58AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> however I'm not quite yet convinced that this patch is going to solve
> this particular deadlock.
> (I agree with the principle of it and I think it's really needed,
> I just don't yet see how it's going to solve this specific de
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > this is another one of those nasty buggers;
>
> Good catch. It's really time that we fix this properly rather than
> adding more kludges to the core code.
>
> Dave, once this goes i
Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
Jean
P.S. : By the way, don't ask me why it took four years for this bug to
get discovered...
that I could answer: Only from 2.6.18-rc1 onwards does the kernel have a built
in deadlock finder :)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev"
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 02:59:58PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:58:00AM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > > Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Could we please just get rid of the wireless extensions over netlink code
> again? It doesn't help to solve anything and just creates a bigger mess
> to untangle when switching to a fully fledged wireless stack.
If we're goi
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:58:00AM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > this is another one of those
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > this is another one of those nasty buggers;
> >
> > Good catch. It's really time that we fix this properly
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > this is another one of those nasty buggers;
>
> Good catch. It's really time that we fix this properly rather than
> adding more kludges to the core code.
>
> Dave, once this goes i
Herbert Xu wrote:
Hi,
Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
this is another one of those nasty buggers;
Good catch. It's really time that we fix this properly rather than
adding more kludges to the core code.
however I'm not quite yet convinced that this patch is going to solve
this
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:41PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > this is another one of those nasty buggers;
>
> Good catch. It's really time that we fix this properly rather than
> adding more kludges to the core code.
>
> Dave, once this goes i
Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> this is another one of those nasty buggers;
Good catch. It's really time that we fix this properly rather than
adding more kludges to the core code.
Dave, once this goes in you can revert the previous netlink workaround
that added the _bh suffix.
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 17:59 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> Wow. Nearly 400 lines of debug spew, from a simple 'ifup eth1'.
>
> Dave
>
>
> ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
> eth1: New link status: Disconnected (0002)
>
> =
Wow. Nearly 400 lines of debug spew, from a simple 'ifup eth1'.
Dave
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
eth1: New link status: Disconnected (0002)
==
[ INFO: hard-safe -> hard-unsafe lock order detected ]
15 matches
Mail list logo
