[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091222181000.GA71727@trillian.comsick.at>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:10:00 +0100
From: Michael Guntsche <mike@...loops.com>
To: Kumar Gopalpet-B05799 <B05799@...escale.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] 2.6.33-rc1 gianfar error message
On 2009.12.22 10:32:49 , Kumar Gopalpet-B05799 wrote:
> >Just for my understanding. Is the first diff part of the fix as well?
> >With this change the FCB is only removed if there are padded bytes, why
> >would this make a difference here?
> >
>
> Yes, the first diff portion is not required.
>
> Also, if you confirm that the changes are working fine.
> I will generate a clean patch and send it out.
> Thanks for reporting it and testing it out.
Hi,
Since you said that the first patch is not needed
@@ -2470,10 +2470,11 @@ static int gfar_process_frame(struct net_device
fcb = (struct rxfcb *)skb->data;
/* Remove the FCB from the skb */
- skb_set_queue_mapping(skb, fcb->rq);
/* Remove the padded bytes, if there are any */
- if (amount_pull)
+ if (amount_pull) {
+ skb_set_queue_mapping(skb, fcb->rq);
skb_pull(skb, amount_pull);
+ }
if (priv->rx_csum_enable)
gfar_rx_checksum(skb, fcb);
I only applied the second one and tested again. Right after the reboot I got an error so apparently this change IS required as well.
Kind regards,
Michael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists