Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: tzanger <tzanger@benshaw.com>
To: David S. Miller <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
Date: March 30, 1998 9:03 AM
Subject: Re: 2.1.91: Kernel panic: Attempted to kill the idle task!
>>I think it's a misnomer the more I think about it, and I even tested
>>2.1.x connections using TCP options through a 2.0.x IP MASQ machine
>>tonight, it looked pretty much kosher.
>
>
>>It's smelling more like a 2.1.x bug at this point.
>
>
>I've been running alpha kernels since about 2.1.79, running IP Masq for the
>office here on a DX4/120 with 16 megs of RAM... while I've only had the
>kernel panic once on 2.1.90, 91p3 seemed to "fix" this -- I have *always*
>gotten IP_MASQ checksum errors.. . ALWAYS, but with 91 and 92p1 I've been
>getting general TCP checksum errors that have been mentioned in this list.
>We do a LOT of masquerading here... there are 20 Win95 machines in the
>office and they ALL go through this machine. Not to mention a few people
>using autofw for ICQ and I've experimented with portfw.
>
>I can't say these crashes are masq-related, at least not solely mask
>related... if it werent' for the constant kernel updates to try and stay
>current iwth the list, this machine would have weeks if not months of
>uptime. The only problem I really have with this machine is getting the
>F&$#&%#'in floppy tape drive to work, 2.1.x doesn't seem to like tape
>drives, but that's another mailing list <g>
>
>Oh, and those couple of crashes I did have were due (I think) to the new
>swapping algos which had some bugs -- at least one of them was for sure --
>right now I've been running 2.1.92p1 with a few suggested swap fixes since
>about 6 hours after p1 came out with no trouble.
>
>Andrew
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu