From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 6 18:11:36 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A23716A419 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2007 18:11:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peo@intersonic.se) Received: from neonpark.inter-sonic.com (neonpark.inter-sonic.com [212.247.8.98]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7CA13C4AA for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2007 18:11:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from peo@intersonic.se) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at inter-sonic.com Message-ID: <4730AA30.7090607@intersonic.se> Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 18:53:52 +0100 From: Per olof Ljungmark Organization: Intersonic AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Lambrev References: <472B1E89.5080006@moneybookers.com> <47303578.8060703@moneybookers.com> In-Reply-To: <47303578.8060703@moneybookers.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rtfree: 0xc741ee88 has 1 refs 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, 06 Nov 2007 18:11:36 -0000 Stefan Lambrev wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry to reply to myself, but I found that the problem exist only if the > GW is carp interface, e.g. 10.1.1.1 sits on carp0 on default GW. > I'm still testing how to reproduce this in my test lab and will fill a PR. > > Stefan Lambrev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I see rtfree: 0xc741ee88 has 1 refs with freebsd releng_7 (i386) from >> today. >> >> I think it's easy reproducible. What I have is: >> >> releng_7 (10.1.1.2) -> default GW (10.1.1.1) >> on default GW I have route to 10.10.1.1/24 -> 10.1.1.3 >> >> so everytime when 10.1.1.2 try to contact someone from 10.10.1.1/24 I >> see: >> rtfree: 0xc741ee88 has 1 refs >> >> if I add direct route on 10.1.1.2 to 10.10.1.1/24 through 10.1.1.3 the >> message will go away. >> >> Should I ignore this msg for now, or should I expect kernel panic >> soon? :) Just FYI, I see this on a few boxes including the 7-BETA2 I'm writing this on. None of them has a carp interface though. What I find interesting here is that none of them are able to run a SMP kernel without crashing (no panic, they're just frozen completely). Perhaps it is a coincidence, I don't know, but I am very interested in your findings and have testbeds if you need. --per