From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 1 May 2001 13:26:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 1 May 2001 13:26:29 -0400 Received: from minus.inr.ac.ru ([193.233.7.97]:64525 "HELO ms2.inr.ac.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 1 May 2001 13:26:15 -0400 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200105011725.VAA00484@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: 2.4.4: Kernel crash, possibly tcp related To: andrea@suse.de (Andrea Arcangeli) Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 21:25:43 +0400 (MSK DST) Cc: davem@redhat.com, ralf@nyren.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010501190942.B31373@athlon.random> from "Andrea Arcangeli" at May 1, 1 07:09:42 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > zero and we are running in such slow path, it is obvious the send_head > _was_ NULL when we entered the critical section, so it's perfectly fine It is not only not obvious, it is not true almost always. On normally working tcp send_head is almost never NULL, it is NULL only when application is so slow that is not able to saturate pipe. If you do not believe my word, add printk checking this. 8) Alexey