| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent crash on ip_conntrack removal |
| From: | Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:58:06 +0200 |
| Cc: | dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxx, laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, okir@xxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040829125708.5aa70469.davem@davemloft.net> |
| References: | <412A8FB5.4080700@trash.net> <OFE08A3DF5.09BCA1C4-ON88256EFA.00806C05-88256EFA.0080E98F@us.ibm.com> <20040828231529.051a73cc.davem@davemloft.net> <4132303C.2060807@trash.net> <20040829125708.5aa70469.davem@davemloft.net> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040413 Debian/1.6-5 |
David S. Miller wrote: Does 2.4.x have this problem too? I thought it didn't.
ChangeSet@xxxxxx, 2004-08-18 14:28:05-07:00, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [IPV4]: Fix theoretical loop on SMP in ip_evictor(). Snapshot the amount of work to do, and just do it. In this way we avoid a theoretical loop whereby one cpu sits in ip_evictor() tossing fragments while another keeps adding a fragment just as we bring ip_frag_mem down below the low threshold. Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent crash on ip_conntrack removal, Patrick McHardy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH,RFT] 8139cp TSO support, Francois Romieu |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent crash on ip_conntrack removal, Patrick McHardy |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Prevent crash on ip_conntrack removal, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |