![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 12:51:30PM +0100, Bart De Schuymer wrote: > > > > Just take a look at the backtrace in the original post. It clearly > > shows a problem. And it points strongly towards br-netfilter. > > I don't doubt you are a much better reader of such backtraces than me. > However, let's count the number of times a function from > net/bridge/br_netfilter.c is in the backtrace: > 1. br_nf*: 6 times > 2. *sabotage*: 3 times > Seriously, out of 222 lines, only 9 from bridge-nf. > The function ip_queue_xmit, OTOH, is 8 times in the trace. Yep, but ip_queue_xmit doesn't call itself recursively. Someone must be doing it. And that's likely the bridge code. BTW not all of these entries are probably true, there can be a lot of false positives. > Anyway, as I already suspected weeks ago, AMD must be seeing some > incompatibility between ip_queue (he's using snort) and the bridge-nf > patch. > > He is using the patch (I gave it to him) below on top of the bridge-nf > patch. Before using that patch he got a kernel panic occasionally. > However he seems not to get a message in his syslog. Ok, since this report seems to be for a totally non standard severly hacked up kernel I suppose nothing from it can be concluded for the mainline kernel. Thanks for clearing this up. Note to the original poster: when you report a bug with a patched kernel always mention it. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||