Hello Dave,
I just spotted the second bug too. (For those interested it is described
in the patch).
Please revert the small patch I sent you yesterday before applying the
new one. It contains yesterday's one too (it is because it is for 2.4 too).
Please apply it against both 2.4.23 and 2.6.0-test10. It should apply
cleanly in 2.4.23 case and with some offsets to 2.6.0-test10.
Patch comments:
- Fixed oops in debugging of enqueue/requeue.
- Fixed oops in htb_destroy.
Note that I tested 2.6 only because I'm still downloading 2.4.22 patch
on my slow line. I just wanted to sent the patch ASAP. I'll inform you
about result later but I expect no problems.
-------------------------------
Martin Devera aka devik
Linux kernel QoS/HTB maintainer
http://luxik.cdi.cz/~devik/
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:18:37 +0100 (CET)
> devik <devik@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I discovered reason of the first Daniel's OOPS. It is change
> > which was not forward-ported to 2.6.
> > It is attached.
>
> Thanks a lot for tracking this problem down Devik.
>
> Patch applied, thanks again.
>
>
htb_k2.6.0t10_n_k2.4.23_to_3.14.diff
Description: Text document
|