All devices that are missing busylock were already buggy ;)
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:59 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> On 6/8/16 2:32 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:31 PM, David Ahern
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6/8/16 2:30 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
It looks VRF was
On 6/8/16 2:32 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:31 PM, David Ahern wrote:
On 6/8/16 2:30 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
It looks VRF was already lacking annotation for busylock then ?
I sent a patch adding IFF_NO_QUEUE flag
OK, but we still need the fix, in case a qdisc is ins
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:31 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> On 6/8/16 2:30 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>
>>
>> It looks VRF was already lacking annotation for busylock then ?
>
>
> I sent a patch adding IFF_NO_QUEUE flag
>
OK, but we still need the fix, in case a qdisc is installed on vrf
(who knows...)
I
On 6/8/16 2:30 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
It looks VRF was already lacking annotation for busylock then ?
I sent a patch adding IFF_NO_QUEUE flag
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:17 AM, David Ahern wrote:
> Getting the below splat with ping in a VRF. git bisect points to:
>
> dsa@kenny:~/kernel-2.git$ git bisect good
> f9eb8aea2a1e12fc2f584d1627deeb957435a801 is the first bad commit
> commit f9eb8aea2a1e12fc2f584d1627deeb957435a801
> Author: Eric
Getting the below splat with ping in a VRF. git bisect points to:
dsa@kenny:~/kernel-2.git$ git bisect good
f9eb8aea2a1e12fc2f584d1627deeb957435a801 is the first bad commit
commit f9eb8aea2a1e12fc2f584d1627deeb957435a801
Author: Eric Dumazet
Date: Mon Jun 6 09:37:15 2016 -0700
net_sched:
