Re: [PATCH] ibm_emac: Correctly detect old link speed

2007-05-20 Thread David Gibson
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 08:44:47PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > On Wednesday 16 May 2007, Eugene Surovegin wrote: > > On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 01:00:08PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > > > This patch fixes a bug where the link speed change was not > > > detected correctly. This occured on a 440SPe (EM

Sending ipv6 packets from a kernel module

2007-05-20 Thread Anton
Hi all, Please excuse me if the following question has already been asked on the mailing list, I am a little new to this. I am trying to send IPv6 packets from a kernel module. As far as I understand, I would have to use the ip6_output() function, and this function is certainly present in th

[IPV6] ADDRCONF: Fix conflicts in DEVCONF_xxx constant.

2007-05-20 Thread YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
Signed-off-by: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- diff --git a/include/linux/ipv6.h b/include/linux/ipv6.h index 09ea01a..648bd1f 100644 --- a/include/linux/ipv6.h +++ b/include/linux/ipv6.h @@ -209,9 +209,8 @@ enum { DEVCONF_RTR_PROBE_INTERVAL, DEVCONF_ACCEPT_RA_RT_INFO_MAX_

Re: e1000: assertion hit in e1000_clean(), kernel 2.6.21.1

2007-05-20 Thread Kok, Auke
Herbert Xu wrote: Kok, Auke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The source file has four extra lines at the top because of a trivial wireless patch, so 898 in that code is really 894 in the stock kernel. please shared that code then. I've had a look and e1000 is definitely buggy. The problem is that

Re: STRANGE ERROR

2007-05-20 Thread Vitaly Bordug
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 16:34 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 20 May 2007 00:30:55 +0200 "Sasa Ostrouska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi everybody, > > > > I tried today to upgrade the kernel to 2.6.21.1 and i got the same > > error during the boot time. > > Here is the dmesg of the 2.

Re: [5/5] 2.6.22-rc2: known regressions

2007-05-20 Thread Herbert Xu
Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Looks more like the IPV6 SNMP6 OOPS, I saw and fixed with: > > commit 5632c5152aa621885d87ea0b8fdd5a6bb9f69c6f > Author: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sat Apr 28 21:16:39 2007 -0700 > >[IPV6]: Track device renames in snmp6. >

Re: e1000: assertion hit in e1000_clean(), kernel 2.6.21.1

2007-05-20 Thread Herbert Xu
Kok, Auke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The source file has four extra lines at the top because of a >> trivial wireless patch, so 898 in that code is really 894 in >> the stock kernel. > > please shared that code then. I've had a look and e1000 is definitely buggy. The problem is that you're

[NET] napi: Call __netif_rx_complete in netif_rx_complete

2007-05-20 Thread Herbert Xu
Hi Dave: [NET] napi: Call __netif_rx_complete in netif_rx_complete This patch kills a little bit of code duplication between the two variants of netif_rx_complete. Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <

Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8491] New: OOPS triggered by ip(8) deconfiguring a network interface

2007-05-20 Thread Herbert Xu
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [43092.388000] Stack: e30f433c cab6 c028608e e2e8ae40 > e2e8a5c0 dfe0aa58 > [43092.388000]c826ca00 c826ca00 f10a72ff f1088989 00a33d71 80fe > 0001 > [43092.388000]cab6 e2e8a5c0 dfe0aa58 0

Re: [PATCH] libertas: skb dereferenced after netif_rx

2007-05-20 Thread David Miller
From: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 21:47:00 -0400 > Dan Williams wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 14:09 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > >> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 05:01:27PM -0400, Florin Malita wrote: > >>> In libertas_process_rxed_packet() and process_rxed_802_11_packe