Re: decnet versions

[sjw44@eng.cam.ac.uk]

Hi,

If you've a chance to get the crash dump from Linux, can you find out
which function it was in when it crashed ? The whole stack back trace
would be more useful still.. ?

If you've browsed the source you will have noticed that I'd started
thinking about Phase III support, but never got very far with it. If there
is a call for it, then I'll see what I can do about implementing it, so let
me know and I'll put it on my TODO list. Like most of the features, I just
did what seemed useful to me, so shout if thers anything else not on my
list that you'd like to see.

You are correct in saying that 60.648 is an invalid PhaseIII address,
since PhaseIII addresses don't have areas. I need to add code to fill
in the area with that of the local node/router when talking to a PhaseIII
node and to remove the area number after.

Also I should take the oppertunity to point out that that code in the
2.3.xx kernel series, is much more recent (the 2.3.39 patch being the
latest) than that in the 2.2.xx series. I has the choice of back porting
the bug fixes and code I had written to 2.2.xx, or producing something
much better in time for 2.4.xx. I chose the latter (due to time constraints),
so if 2.2.xx doesn't work, try 2.3.xx with all the usual warnings about
expecting crashes etc. with development kernels :-)

Once 2.4.xx is out, I'm certainly not going to back port any more stuff to
the 2.2.xx kernel series. I'm hoping that 2.4.xx is not far away now, but just
far enough to allow proper testing and bug fixing of the routing code :-)

Steve.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send a mail to majordomo@dreamtime.org
containing the line "unsubscribe linux-decnet"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------