[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1310200936590.1538@ssi.bg>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 09:39:26 +0300 (EEST)
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
cc: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brooks <mark@...dbalancer.org>,
Phil Oester <kernel@...uxace.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] ipv6: Use destination address determined by
IPVS
Hello,
On Sat, 19 Oct 2013, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 07:37:10PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> >
> > Problem with process stack? May be some packet loop
> > happens? Because I can not reproduce such problem in my
> > virtual setup, I tested TEE too, with careful packet
> > matching and 1 CPU. Should I assume that you don't have such
> > oops when the patch is not applied, with the same TEE rule?
>
> Oh, sorry, you are right. It happens with an unpatched net-next kernel, too.
>
> I inserted the TEE rule in mangel/OUTGOING and had only one route, ip -6 r a
> default via fe80::1 dev eth0 which at the time of the panic was actually not
> reachable.
Thanks for the confirmation! I'll try later
to reproduce such problem with TEE, it is interesting
to know the real reason for this loop.
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
--
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