netdev
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: System crash in tcp_fragment()

from [David S. Miller] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: george@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: System crash in tcp_fragment()
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 00:22:49 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: niv@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, ak@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ak@xxxxxx, pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3CE9F679.90ACF597@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <3CE9E466.AC2358EE@xxxxxxxxxx> <20020520.230021.29510217.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3CE9F679.90ACF597@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx 
   From: george anzinger <george@xxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 00:25:46 -0700
   
   I understand the issue.  The question is what is the
   result.  Bogus numbers do.. what?  Does the kernel crash or
   does the user think strange things while every thing just
   keeps on working?

It's a quality of implementation issue.

It is just one example of a place where we use these kinds
of assumptions to index tables and the like.
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: System crash in tcp_fragment(), george anzinger
Next by Date:  Re: [PATCH] net/core/sock.c - 2.4.18, David S. Miller
Previous by Thread:  Re: System crash in tcp_fragment(), george anzinger
Next by Thread:  Re: System crash in tcp_fragment(), kuznet
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]