David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > while going through going netlink code I found out that netlink_bind()
>> > does not properly check bind parameters. I checked both 2.6.23-rc1 as
>> > well as 2.6.16.53, both are affected.
> Firstly, you patch compares the address _pointer_ against
>
e two.
Signed-off-by: Holger Eitzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
commit 3155c34167184c31afeac2a061c0e0b9cd401d56
tree b5efe4234a5835e823b6b024f8d96e56f4abfd18
parent f695baf2df9e0413d3521661070103711545207a
author Holger Eitzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tue, 18 Sep 2007 23:10:11 +0200
Holger Eitzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> while going through going netlink code I found out that netlink_bind()
> does not properly check bind parameters. I checked both 2.6.23-rc1 as
> well as 2.6.16.53, both are affected.
>
> With a small test prog I wasn't
Hi,
while going through going netlink code I found out that netlink_bind()
does not properly check bind parameters. I checked both 2.6.23-rc1 as
well as 2.6.16.53, both are affected.
With a small test prog I wasn't able to crash my maschine though, but
data was accessed out of bounds.
Please ap
Hi,
in nl_pid_hash_dilute() there is:
if (unlikely(avg > 1) && nl_pid_hash_rehash(hash, 1))
return 1;
if (unlikely(len > avg) && time_after(jiffies, hash->rehash_time)) {
nl_pid_hash_rehash(hash, 0);
return 1;
}
I don't see a reason why periodically rehash
Holger Eitzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> bonding: ad_tx_machine() 1210: Sent LACPDU on port 1
> bonding: bond_3ad_rx_indication() 2175: Received LACPDU on port 1
> bonding: ad_rx_machine() 1123: Rx Machine: Port=1, Last State=6, Curr
>State=6
One important point
Jay Vosburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The log you included (with debug turned on) indicates that
> bonding is at least attempting to send LACPDUs, but there are no log
> entries for having received any LACPDUs.
Yes, the log clearly shows that the LACPDUs are sent, at least bonding
thin
Andy Gospodarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I get the impression that sky2 has never worked for you. Is that
> correct? There was an skge problem I noticed a while ago where on reset
> the multicast membership list was cleared.
Well, when it comes to bonding: yes, almost :). When I noticed
Jay Vosburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm unfamiliar with your particular switch, but usually this
> kind of problem with bonding 802.3ad is in the switch interaction. The
> switches I have (Cisco) require that 802.3ad mode be explicitly enabled
> on whichever ports it is desired on, s
Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I used both use_carrier=1 (default) as well as miimon=50 without luck.
>
> use_carrier should work (since device reports carrier transistions).
As you can see in the script I used both use_carrier and miimon (in
combinations) without success. In f
Hi Steven,
I have problems using sky2 v1.10 with with bonding driver (802.3ad),
on 'Marvell 88E8053 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller'. I have attached
the full lspci output.
My test was to setup a bond of two physical links (both links same
hardware) and ping 192.168.11.10, which is the address
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 11:14:14AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg06355.html
> > A look into /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_mem showed that that the values in
> > there were way to high. I hope that a reduction of these values will
> > help (not done
might be a lot.
Why not pass the flags directly (e. g. debug=0x11ff)?
But I understand your point, and in fact I am interested in link up/down
messages too :).
/holger
--
Holger Eitzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Kernel Developer
Astaro AG | www.astaro.com | Phone +49-721-25516-246 | Fa
ged.
The applied patch corrects this.
/holger
--
Holger Eitzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Kernel Developer
Astaro AG | www.astaro.com | Phone +49-721-25516-246 | Fax -200
Documentation: http://docs.astaro.org
User Bulletin Board: http://www.astaro.org
- Certified by ICSA labs - June
14 matches
Mail list logo
