From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 1 00:18:18 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9383E16A4E0 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 00:18:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.102]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D461E43D46 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2006 00:18:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from mr02.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.22]) by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2006 20:18:21 -0400 Received: from smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.11]) by mr02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 3.7.5a-GA) with ESMTP id LYY17804; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:18:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 65-78-24-149.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) ([65.78.24.149]) by smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2006 20:18:01 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.07,199,1151899200"; d="scan'208"; a="247204692:sNHT27340020" From: Robert Huff MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17614.40142.109365.481255@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 20:14:06 -0400 To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <44CE6C0A.50009@FreeBSD.org> References: <20060726063636.GA58151@freefall.freebsd.org> <17610.836.663396.331448@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <44CE6C0A.50009@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta27) "fiddleheads" XEmacs Lucid X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=mr02.lnh.mail.rcn.net X-Junkmail-SD-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A090205.44CE9D66.0007,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=207.172.4.11, so=2006-05-09 23:27:51, dmn=5.2.4/2006-05-04 Cc: Subject: Re: LOR when booting CURRENT X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 00:18:18 -0000 Christian S.J. Peron writes: > > For the record, I'm (still) getting this also. > > This appears to be similar to the LOR associated with IPFW and ucred > based rules, I think. Although this is a lock order reversal and it > probably isn't a false positive, it should be reasonably harmless, > because the pfil hook lock is a reader lock, thus different threads can > acquire it (at this point) con-currently, presumably preventing a dead > lock from actually occurring here. To my knowledge, not so: please see kern/86427. This puppy will choke my -CURRENT system in around ten days under a light network load. Under substantial traffic, less than three. I had hoped the network stack changes Robert Watson committed a while back would fix this, but apparently not. This is a _major_ pain in the ass, and I look forward to the day when someone drives a backtrace through its pulsing green heart. Robert Huff