| To: | george@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Network oops |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 09 Jun 2002 22:06:21 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ak@xxxxxx, pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3D042F8F.72764243@mvista.com> |
| References: | <3D0390E2.1B80ADEE@mvista.com> <20020609.213150.32126725.davem@redhat.com> <3D042F8F.72764243@mvista.com> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: george anzinger <george@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 21:48:15 -0700 I would expect that the network code would recover from this sort of thing, so we are looking for a preempt issue at the moment. Still, it could just be the way things work in the 2.4.17 kernel so I thought I would ask. Even though 2.4.17 is pretty old I still think it's a preempt problem. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Network oops, george anzinger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets, Mark Mielke |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Network oops, george anzinger |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Network oops, george anzinger |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |