lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 21:51:28 +0200 (EET) From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> To: Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@...il.com>, Ray Lee <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>, Chris Wedgwood <cw@...f.org> cc: Giangiacomo Mariotti <giangiacomo_mariotti@...oo.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: WARNING: at net/ipv4/tcp_input.c:2054 tcp_mark_head_lost() On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Guillaume Chazarain wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> wrote: >>> It does not contain any "KERNEL: assertion (packets <= >> > tp->packets_out) failed at" line, so I'm afraid it's just noise. Doh, you were right in this one... >> At least it catches one bug which could cause that assertion (it is much >> more rigid than the assertion and thus it catched it even though you >> won't see that assertion to ever trigger :-)). > > Great :-) ...I spoke too early, it was just that the verify call was placed into a place where the fackets_out is not yet reduced (I had too many version of that patch when I first did that and probably picked wrong one of them as a starting point, I'm sorry about that). I'll send an updated patch tomorrow for you and also correct it so that I don't need to ask things like this again (as long as one pastes couple of first occuring stacktraces): >>> Could you next figure out what is at: -- i.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists