netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Still bug-hunting

To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Still bug-hunting
From: Christian Schmid <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 21:04:12 +0100
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050305195712.GO31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4229F2EC.8090103@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050305102918.15fd422c.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4229FC15.3070408@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050305104854.45106335.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422A0079.4080806@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050305105706.2c8a6975.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422A0354.3080800@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050305195712.GO31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8a3) Gecko/20040817
Thomas Graf wrote:
* Christian Schmid <422A0354.3080800@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-03-05 20:07

Actually we are a company and the big ones decided to buy new servers to work-around this bug. This is a common technique in companies. I say this sucks and thats why I experienced in our production system in order to give linux something back by reporting and helping to fix a bug which only appears on big systems. I do not understand why you start flaming at me.


It's quite simple, provide a test case and someone will start looking
into the problem (given there is one). The information you provided so far
is quite vague, it would be pure luck to spot the bug. You have do
understand that looking into such a bug may cost dozens of hours or days if
it can't be reproduced by the person. Nobody does this without at least very
strong evidences that the bug actually exists and your appereance so
far didn't help too much I guess.

I just asked for a way how to change the dynamic memory-allocation for buffers to a static one. I dont think that this is much work and is a quite direct task.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>