Hmm - I have to look at 2.6's definition of rb_next. It
might be the case ! I'll check it.
Thanks, devik
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 20:50:16 +0100 (CET)
> devik <devik@cdi.cz> wrote:
>
> > thanks for the report. I know that there is an issue regarding
> > HTB in 2.6.x. Please send me net/sched/sch_htb.o,
> > net/sched/sch_htb.c (just to be sure) and be sure that you
> > build the kernel with debugging symbols (see debugging section
> > of menuconfig/xconfig).
>
> I think the problem is the changes that were made
> in 2.5.x to htb_next_rb_node(). It used to be:
>
> static void htb_next_rb_node(rb_node_t **n)
> {
> rb_node_t *p;
> if ((*n)->rb_right) {
> /* child at right. use it or its leftmost ancestor */
> *n = (*n)->rb_right;
> while ((*n)->rb_left)
> *n = (*n)->rb_left;
> return;
> }
> while ((p = (*n)->rb_parent) != NULL) {
> /* if we've arrived from left child then we have next node */
> if (p->rb_left == *n) break;
> *n = p;
> }
> *n = p;
> }
>
> But it was changed into:
>
> static void htb_next_rb_node(struct rb_node **n)
> {
> *n = rb_next(*n);
> }
>
> This is wrong, the new code has much different side effects
> than the original code.
>
> This looks like the problem, devik what do you think?
>
>
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
