Re: RTNL: assertion failed at net/ipv6/addrconf.c (1699)
From: Cong Wang
Date: Tue Sep 02 2014 - 14:37:18 EST
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 11:15 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
>> That is what we do when backporting patches, I can do that if David asks
>> me to backport it, but you know for netdev that is David's work.
>> (I am not saying I don't want to help him, I just want to point out the fact.
>> I am very pleased to help David for stable backports as long as he asks)
> Problem is : your patch submission do not identify bug origin.
> You claim you want to help, but you do not provide the basic thing that
> _really_ helps.
> The proper way to identify bug origin is to add in the headers one
> line :
> Fixes: 12-digit-SHA1 ("patch title")
Since when "Fixes:" tag becomes mandatory for a stable patch?
At least netdev-FAQ is not updated. ;-) I 100% agree "Fixes:"
is helpful when backporting patches, but it is not mandatory currently.
For this patch, I was too lazy to dig the history, it looks like this is
caused by the following commit:
Author: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu Mar 27 18:28:07 2014 +0100
ipv6: move DAD and addrconf_verify processing to workqueue
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/