On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Francois Romieu wrote:
> (please don't top post)
Sorry about that.
> David Russell :
>> I kind of thought my patch was at best incomplete. When you state
>> this change silences the bug but does not fix it, what are the
>> implications of systems running this pa
(please don't top post)
David Russell :
> I kind of thought my patch was at best incomplete. When you state
> this change silences the bug but does not fix it, what are the
> implications of systems running this patch? We have some production
> systems using this patch. They reboot daily, but
I kind of thought my patch was at best incomplete. When you state
this change silences the bug but does not fix it, what are the
implications of systems running this patch? We have some production
systems using this patch. They reboot daily, but have been solid.
In addition, if we sent you a pi
David Russell :
> When connected directly to another system (not via a switch)
> eventually a condition where a NULL pointer dereference occurs in
> enc28j60_hw_tx() and this patch simply checks for that condition and
> returns gracefully without causing a kernel panic. I believe, but
> have not
When connected directly to another system (not via a switch)
eventually a condition where a NULL pointer dereference occurs in
enc28j60_hw_tx() and this patch simply checks for that condition and
returns gracefully without causing a kernel panic. I believe, but
have not investigated this is caused
