On Sam, 2008-12-06 at 22:47 +0100, Henning Rogge wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@firmix.at> wrote:
> > On Sam, 2008-12-06 at 22:18 +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > [...]
> >> Well, that should go into -stable IMHO.
> >
> > Perhaps it's better/simpler/less risky/... to make a 0.5.7 from the tip
> > of http://gredler.at/hg/olsrd?
> If we can track down the routing-segfault that might be an idea for
> the the comming weeks. :)

In http://gredler.at/hg/olsrd is a routing seg-fault?
Other than that: If some offset calculation is wrong, I can easily
imagine that writing to the wrong place leads to seg-faults somewhere
else (or otherwise strange/invalid data) as the "wrong place" - even if
it's only 2 bytes could touch other malloc()ed data which just had bad
luck being malloc()ed  at the wrong place at the wrong time.

> If not we can just add a "__packed" attribute to each of the LQ
> structs, this resolves the problem (already tested).

That's IMHO an workaround (around the wrong sizeof()s) at most.

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services



