On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 01:14:43PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
Below is a patch that fixes ONE
sk_buff leak (maintainer added to cc: hi, Paul:-)). Still investigating if
there are more there.
Are you still seeing the skb cache growing with your
From: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:02:22 +1000
> David Miller writes:
>
> > The PPP generic layer seems to be very careful about it's handling of
> > the ->xmit_pending packet.
>
> Mostly, but I think that this is a genuine leak.
>
> > I'm really surprised this l
From: Samuel Ortiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 02:50:59 +0300
> I still think Guennadi's fix is correct even if you return 0 from the TX
> function only when you're running out of space. If we unregister the ppp
> interface before we get a chance to call ppp_output_wake(), then we'l
David Miller writes:
> The PPP generic layer seems to be very careful about it's handling of
> the ->xmit_pending packet.
Mostly, but I think that this is a genuine leak.
> I'm really surprised this leak doesn't trigger already via the
> ppp_synctty.c and ppp_async.c drivers, perhaps they do som
Guennadi Liakhovetski writes:
> Don't leak an sk_buff on interface destruction.
>
> Signed-off-by: G. Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mo
On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 10:10:34PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 13:14:43 +0100 (CET)
>
> > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm quite sure the
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 13:14:43 +0100 (CET)
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> >
> >> I'm quite sure the leak is in the IrDA code rather than in the ppp or
> >> ipv4 one, hence the ne
On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 01:14:43PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> >
> >> I'm quite sure the leak is in the IrDA code rather than in the ppp or
> >> ipv4 one, hence the need for full irda debug
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
I'm quite sure the leak is in the IrDA code rather than in the ppp or
ipv4 one, hence the need for full irda debug...
Well, looks like you were wrong, Samuel. Below is a patch that fixes ONE
sk_buff l
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
On 3/21/2007, "Guennadi Liakhovetski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[] (__kfree_skb+0x0/0x170) from [] (kfree_skb+0x24/0x50)
r5 = C332BC00 r4 = C332BC00
[] (kfree_skb+0x0/0x50) from []
(irlap_update_nr_received+0x94/0xc8 [irda])
[] (irlap_update_nr_rece
On 3/21/2007, "Guennadi Liakhovetski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>(Short recap for newly added to cc: netdev: I'm seeing an skb leak in
>2.6.20 during an IrDA IrNET+ppp UDP test with periodic connection
>disruptions)
>
>On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, G
(Short recap for newly added to cc: netdev: I'm seeing an skb leak in
2.6.20 during an IrDA IrNET+ppp UDP test with periodic connection
disruptions)
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
Ok, looks like all leaked skbuffs come from
12 matches
Mail list logo
