On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 19:41 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > I think most adjustments are too small to be noticed. Typically > they are just for a few bytes in the header. truesize > is already larger, so it can tolerate some slag. This statement is incompatible with your patch when you think about the exact definition of truesize and the (unconditional!) adjustments your patch makes. > I also only see it occasionally (maybe 5-10 times/day) when > the wireless stack appends a lot of data. Except the data it appends should generally be of the same or very similar size under unchanging conditions, so that doesn't make a lot of sense either. > My proposal would be to include this patch for 2.6.28/2.6.29 > and investigate fixing pskb_expand_head for 2.6.30. I disagree, obviously. I knew there was some truesize corruption, and I think you for tracing down where it occurs. I'll investigate a proper fix when I get around to that, meanwhile I don't think the problem is awfully urgent since we've had this going on for quite a while and, if any, it probably only affects/corrupts the raw monitor sockets. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
