From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 24 21:00:23 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C1CC1065670 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 21:00:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11ED28FC0C for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 21:00:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4OL0MUs050119 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 21:00:22 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p4OL0M3p050118; Tue, 24 May 2011 21:00:22 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 21:00:22 GMT Message-Id: <201105242100.p4OL0M3p050118@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org From: Mark Linimon Cc: Subject: Re: kern/157287: [re] re0: INVARIANTS panic (Memory modified after free) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mark Linimon List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 21:00:23 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/157287; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mark Linimon To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Re: kern/157287: [re] re0: INVARIANTS panic (Memory modified after free) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 15:55:17 -0500 ----- Forwarded message from YongHyeon PYUN ----- Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 12:11:08 -0700 From: YongHyeon PYUN To: linimon@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/157287: [re] re0: INVARIANTS panic (Memory modified after free) User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Because the size is 4092 I vaguely guess it was not caused by re(4). re(4) just uses either 2K or 9K clusters. Of course that does mean re(4) is bug free here. Given that submitter can see panic during booting which in turn means re(4) has little chance to run, it might not be re(4)'s fault. ----- End forwarded message -----