Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 13:17:49 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sbuf-related panic Message-ID: <1426619869.62241.5.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <1426619679.676332.241672369.5773381C@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1426529019.4766.1.camel@hardenedbsd.org> <1426618197.670703.241661961.0D1A6F14@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1426618644.62241.4.camel@freebsd.org> <1426619679.676332.241672369.5773381C@webmail.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 14:14 -0500, Mark Felder wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015, at 13:57, Ian Lepore wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 13:49 -0500, Mark Felder wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015, at 13:03, Shawn Webb wrote: > > > > On amd64, doing a Poudriere run. On r280133: > > > > > > > > > > I appeared to be hitting this on 280130, the most recent CURRENT > > > snapshot. I'm going to build the latest since some sbuf fixes have > > > landed and see if I can finish a poudriere build run. > > > > There is still a panic, one that I can't yet figure out why it wasn't > > panicking before my changes, but I'm working on it. > > > > Is the previous snapshot -- r279813 -- old enough to have missed the > related changes? I'm just trying to get a machine up from 10.1-RELEASE > to relatively CURRENT quickly. That should be safe, my series of sbuf changes that broke things started at r279992. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1426619869.62241.5.camel>