Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-03 Thread Stephen Hemminger
The backtrace in 2.6.12-rc2 is: [ 955.224077] Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:155 [ 955.226547] [ 955.226548] Call Trace: {__kfree_skb+101} {ip_rcv+1255} [ 955.229219]{packet_rcv_spkt+608} {netif_receive_skb+500} [ 955.231976]{:tg3:tg3_poll+1589

Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-03 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:49:29 -0800 (PST) "David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:30:28 -0500 > > > Here's a second flavour. > > Can you git bisect to figure out when this problem started > to occur? > It happened before git

Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-02 Thread David S. Miller
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 19:35:25 -0800 > I triggered this easily to day. will bisect tomorrow. Thanks a lot Stephen. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at

Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-02 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 20:37:51 -0500 Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 04:49:29PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > > From: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:30:28 -0500 > > > > > Here's a second flavour. > > > > Can you git bisect to figu

Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-02 Thread Dave Jones
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 04:49:29PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:30:28 -0500 > > > Here's a second flavour. > > Can you git bisect to figure out when this problem started > to occur? I'll give it a try sometime soon, though

Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-02 Thread David S. Miller
From: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 14:30:28 -0500 > Here's a second flavour. Can you git bisect to figure out when this problem started to occur? Thanks a lot. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: badness in dst_release

2006-02-02 Thread Dave Jones
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:08:33PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > I managed to get a box running 2.6.16rc1-git4 to spit this out.. > > Dave > > UDP: bad checksum. From 192.168.79.115:43047 to 192.168.76.106:61494 ulen > 1083 > Badness in dst_release at

badness in dst_release

2006-02-01 Thread Dave Jones
I managed to get a box running 2.6.16rc1-git4 to spit this out.. Dave UDP: bad checksum. From 192.168.79.115:43047 to 192.168.76.106:61494 ulen 1083 Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154 (Not tainted) [] __kfree_skb+0x36/0xdd [] ip_frag_destroy+0xe2/0x101

Re: [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-08 Thread David S. Miller
From: Julian Anastasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 10:01:39 +0300 (EEST) > One such place that can damage the dst refcnts is route.c > with CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED enabled, i don't see the user's > .config. In this new code i see that rt_intern_hash is called before >

Re: [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-08 Thread David S. Miller
From: Julian Anastasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 10:01:39 +0300 (EEST) > One such place that can damage the dst refcnts is route.c > with CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED enabled, i don't see the user's > .config. In this new code i see that rt_intern_hash is called before >

Re: Fw: [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-07 Thread Julian Anastasov
Hello, On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Begin forwarded message: > > Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:16:19 -0700 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154 One such pla

Re: Fw: [Bugme-new] [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-07 Thread Herbert Xu
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:25:41PM +, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:16:22 -0700 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Bugme-new] [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at > include/net/dst.h:154 Could you please send us your .c

Fw: PROBLEM: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-07 Thread Andrew Morton
I think this got fixed? If so, is the fix queued for 2.6.13.1? Thanks. Begin forwarded message: Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:26:50 +0300 From: Ady Deac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: PROBLEM: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154 [1.] One line s

Fw: [Bugme-new] [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-07 Thread Andrew Morton
Begin forwarded message: Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:16:22 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Bugme-new] [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154 http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5201 Summary: Badness in dst_release at

Fw: [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154

2005-09-07 Thread Stephen Hemminger
Begin forwarded message: Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 06:16:19 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Bug 5201] New: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h:154 http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5201 Summary: Badness in dst_release at include/net/dst.h