Re: [PATCH] r8169: revert "add byte queue limit support".

Eric Dumazet [off-list ref] :

On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 22:55 +0200, Francois Romieu wrote:

quoted

This reverts commit 036dafa28da1e2565a8529de2ae663c37b7a0060.

[...]

bisection is not always the right way to qualify a problem.

I know. At some point I switch from "I could search more" to "users situation
will improve in a definite timeframe".

BQL in itself had some fixes coming _after_ commit 036dafa28da1e2565

Thanks.

They are in stable as of 3.4.5:

commit 4f4bdaeb40df95499c1ee7ea3fbca9d76174a59e
Author:     Hiroaki SHIMODA [off-list ref]
AuthorDate: Wed May 30 12:25:37 2012 +0000
Commit:     Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref]
CommitDate: Mon Jul 16 09:03:43 2012 -0700

    bql: Avoid possible inconsistent calculation.
    
    [ Upstream commit 914bec1011a25f65cdc94988a6f974bfb9a3c10d ]
[...]
commit 1414a53d956340ca8b1b27e05ab94ba63e82ed97
Author:     Hiroaki SHIMODA [off-list ref]
AuthorDate: Wed May 30 12:25:19 2012 +0000
Commit:     Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref]
CommitDate: Mon Jul 16 09:03:43 2012 -0700

    bql: Avoid unneeded limit decrement.

I have obviously not directed users at them and I do not see any
of the victims using a non -stable / -vendor or recent enough
kernel to test this patch since the issue has been reported.

They are both worth testing.

Is there an easy way to reproduce the problem ?

None here :o(

-- 
Ueimor