Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[patch\s+2\/2\]\s+ipvs\s+deadlock\s+fix\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[patch\s+2\/2\]\s+ipvs\s+deadlock\s+fix\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [patch 2/2] ipvs deadlock fix (score: 1): Author:; Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:27:38 -0800; Ok, both patches applied. I'll push it upstream in 2.6.12; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00550.html (7,320 bytes)
2. (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:33:02 -0800; up nice and tight so unless there a; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01401.html (9,308 bytes)
3. tbl not a public symbol in net/ipv6/ndisc.c (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:36:10 +0300; Nigel Cunningham Software Engineer; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01411.html (8,116 bytes)
4. 6/ndisc.c (score: 1): Author: sso@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 01:47:22 -0800; eath. To this end we need to set an; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01412.html (8,128 bytes)
5. tbl not a public symbol in net/ipv6/ndisc.c (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 13:21:12 +0300; rnel, but the code in 2.6.11-rc2 is; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01416.html (8,976 bytes)
6. Re: [patch 2/2] ipvs deadlock fix (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 14:27:38 -0800; Ok, both patches applied. I'll push it upstream in 2.6.12; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01570.html (7,442 bytes)
7. [patch 2/2] ipvs deadlock fix (score: 1): Author: akpm@xxxxxxxx; Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:33:02 -0800; update_defense_level() is calling si_meminfo() from timer context. But si_meminfo takes non-irq-safe locks. Move it all to keventd context. Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> -- 25-akpm/net; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02891.html (9,308 bytes)
8. Re: [patch 2/2] ipvs deadlock fix (score: 1): Author: Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:36:10 +0300; Would I be right in thinking that the offending lock is bdev_lock which is grabbed in nr_blockdev_pages() and thus that this is not an issue for 2.4 whose si_meminfo() does not have such a call? -- H; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02901.html (8,182 bytes)
9. Re: [patch 2/2] ipvs deadlock fix (score: 1): Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 01:47:22 -0800; Yes, 2.4's si_meminfo() seems to be OK from interrupt context. On x86 - I didn't check the other architectures.; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02902.html (8,219 bytes)
10. Re: [patch 2/2] ipvs deadlock fix (score: 1): Author: Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 13:21:12 +0300; Thanks. Me neither. -- Horms; /archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02906.html (9,110 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]