Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Feb 2006 03:14:59 -0500
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: anyone recognize this panic?
Message-ID:  <20060226081459.GA52382@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <44015808.1000201@u.washington.edu>
References:  <17409.8562.677322.222883@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20060226033858.GA10985@xor.obsecurity.org> <440145EF.5000101@u.washington.edu> <20060226061343.GA4483@xor.obsecurity.org> <44014943.8050905@u.washington.edu> <20060226070300.GA59714@xor.obsecurity.org> <44015808.1000201@u.washington.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 11:26:00PM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
>=20
> >On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 10:22:59PM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> >
> >=20
> >
> >>>>>>re0: diagnostic failed to receive packet in loopback mode
> >>>>>>re0: attach aborted due to hardware diagnostic failure
> >>>>>>panic: mtx_lock() of spin mutex (null) @=20
> >>>>>>/usr/src/sys/netinet/in_pcb,c:862
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>	"re0" is a Linksys EG-1032, less than two months old.  It was
> >>>>>>connected, but had zero traffic at the time of the crash.
> >>>>>>	Before I take this to current@ - has anyone seen anything like
> >>>>>>this before?  A quick check of the archives and the web in general
> >>>>>>didn't show anything.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>    =20
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>          =20
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>You need to at least get a traceback from the panic, and preferably a
> >>>>>crashdump.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Kris
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  =20
> >>>>>
> >>>>>        =20
> >>>>>
> >>>>Probably should pass this onto some devs. It seems like a null value=
=20
> >>>>was passed for locking a mutex in the OS, which is important. Having =
a=20
> >>>>traceback would be good though... but at least mentioning that the=20
> >>>>issue laid with the re (?) kernel driver would be a start.
> >>>>=20
> >>>>
> >>>>      =20
> >>>>
> >>>Unfortunately without a traceback the panic string is useless since it
> >>>gives you no clue about how the system got into that state.  This kind
> >>>of panic is often a secondary effect of some other problem.
> >>>
> >>>Kris
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>    =20
> >>>
> >>True, but at least you'd be able to find a way to the affected code...=
=20
> >>After that it's just tests and debugging =3D\...
> >>  =20
> >>
> >
> >I don't understand what you're suggesting; how do you find the
> >affected code without a traceback?
> >
> >Kris
> >
> I'm thinking of the "old fashioned way" of doing things... reading tons=
=20
> of code. Lol.

OK, let us know if you find anything :^)

Kris

--4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEAWODWry0BWjoQKURAp/QAJwMc2kGaE0MvDHkrGX8488l93ft8wCgrNFj
Q7tUaQt4pa1503+pOZEQJCE=
=cv4v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060226081459.GA52382>