On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:03 AM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
You're right! Oops. In my defence, I wrote that at 2 AM last night ;-)
It could be. But like I said in a later e-mail, the thing is likely
sk_buff->truesize. Which is not a flags variable. It _is_ however, a
counter, which is frequently -= and atomic_sub()ed.
That field is also an int, not a byte like I suggested above. This is
fine, though. "--" on an int can of course legitimately update/change
just the lower byte of an int.
But.. it could also be some random corruption coming from elsewhere.
Maybe even bad RAM (it's just a single bit anyway). But that's less
likely.
Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html