From owner-freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 24 17:36:59 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD23C106566C for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:36:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gy0-f182.google.com (mail-gy0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82EAA8FC0C for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:36:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gyf3 with SMTP id 3so1444645gyf.13 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:36:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=0YWGxfmvtr6UoD1zv6R2IStcj+kcb6EFPsotc3qNF1I=; b=dh+Md5xYQ7EbK3wI8PCNW9uSA3wbI6z31/TWVYZnS9ekquyGyM5ZvF2eY3Uxw64VhL mIFg3wIQyvHu5ZOXeLtqfRKh8hE7jKhdyCndAcs259ZoTQtFN6QW+3FUfOW0QVy9DNkl +h9EafZPS9AU+gnCaNSW8pVnSg3TU1x9A0f/E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=K/T0SKuslLEwsMlrqTpRgszeAoA8fk3NvwG1MT9B4+0R2+BeeEKS1yzlawwu0dB8GE mTGerTJuUjVpUE716s4SWsZg9bivK8k013JiCq9MW0Q2TFs/FIshhJOmaVBNTA4SL69k bTWt3zfpxHZw5146fZcr+kd7AEfrok9OhD/TE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.151.13.9 with SMTP id q9mr4974927ybi.73.1295889273123; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:14:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.147.182.20 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:14:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201953550.20110106221821@nitronet.pl> <57312439.20110107171430@nitronet.pl> <13247006.20110124020848@nitronet.pl> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:14:33 -0800 Message-ID: From: Jack Vogel To: Brandon Gooch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Pawel Tyll , Luigi Rizzo , freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Panic] Dummynet/IPFW related recurring crash. X-BeenThere: freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFW Technical Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:36:59 -0000 Just replying so you know I'm seeing it, but something that takes 14 days to even happen is NOT going to be an easy one to find. As Brandon said, all the info you can provide please. Jack On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Brandon Gooch wrote: > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Pawel Tyll wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2011, Brandon Gooch wrote: > >> It's likely that the mbuf handling problem (in em_refresh_mbufs()) is > >> triggered by the processing you're doing with ipfw (or elsewhere for > >> that matter), so, yes, I think it's a bug fixed in the revision > >> discussed. > > > >> When you update and test, please let us know. Also, don't forget to > >> submit a follow-up to your PR. > > > > Unfortunately bad news: > > > > Machine fell after 14 days, 22:31:42 for the same reason according to > > what was left of panic screen. It didn't do a dump, nor reboot as is > > customary since some time on S3420GP boards (and other Intel server > > boards, since colleague has dual-cpu board from same epoch). > > > > What can I try next? > > I'm not sure. Perhaps there is another code path in the em(4) driver > that leads to the same, bad-pointer state. I'll have to defer to Jack > Vogel or Luigi Rizzo for potential insight into the issue. > > Please provide as much information as possible (even if it comes down > to taking a photo of the console, or transcribing the backtrace). > > FYI, I haven't been able to test this on any of my setups yet... > > -Brandon >