Even if the patch is not good, the line dst_free(&rt->u.dst);
when rt is still in tree leads to a crash, but when you do not
do the dst_free, when rt is in tree, then it may have hidden
other bugs, but at least I can keep working.
I never said my patch was good, but it does the minimum to avoid my bug:
if (fn->leaf == NULL) {
bug_8895_clownix_provisional_workaround = 1;
fn->leaf = rt;
atomic_inc(&rt->rt6i_ref);
}
...
ip6_fib.c, line 796:
if (!bug_8895_clownix_provisional_workaround)
dst_free(&rt->u.dst);
That way at least it does not crash.
I cannot provide more than the line and the reason for the crash, I am
one of the numerous brainless users.
On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 16:14 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: vincent-perrier <vincent-perrier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:10:29 +0200
>
> > I am an end user, I do not know precisely what bisecting means, but I
> > have spent some time on bug 8895, I suppose I have totally bisseced it,
> > but it seems that it has been lost.
> > It is clearly a bug and I am still patching every kernel to avoid the
> > fib6 crash, obviously I am the only one to get it.
>
> I remember this bug.
>
> The analysis is incorrect and the patch adds new errors.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> �
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
