Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 08:41:16 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Current <current@FreeBSD.org>, Andrew Thompson <thompsa@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: panic: ifc_free_unit: bit is already cleared Message-ID: <20051011064014.GA76710@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <20051005205515.GA30350@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <20051005024903.GA72743@heff.fud.org.nz> <20051005203639.GA20552@garage.freebsd.pl> <20051005205515.GA30350@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:55:15PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: +> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 10:36:39PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: +> > On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:49:03PM +1300, Andrew Thompson wrote: +> > +> Hi, +> > +>=20 +> > +> I have found a repeatable panic with network device cloning, unfort= unatly I am +> > +> unable to dump on this box. This is sparc64 with a 2 day old curren= t. +> >=20 +> > The order is wrong in vlan_modevent(). +> >=20 +> > if_clone_detach() is freeing ifc_units field, so ifc_free_unit() shoul= d not +> > be called after that. +> >=20 +> > This patch should fix the problem: +> >=20 +> > http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/if_vlan.c.patch +>=20 +> Yes. This does introduce a race in that a new interface could +> be created between the vlan_clone_destroy loop and the call to +> if_clone_detach. It's going to be hard to trigger, but it probably +> should be fixed. Since cloning isn't performance critical, I think +> adding a dead flag to the clone structure and failing all attempts once +> the flag is set. I think it is a low-risk patch and the race isn't really critical. What do you guys think about going with this fix for 6.0? I'm all for better fix (the one thompsa@ is working on) going to HEAD and 6.1, but better fix - higher risk. So what's your opinion? Or maybe we will be able to create low-risk complete fix? --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! --CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDS16MForvXbEpPzQRAr+zAJ981doxmwrcbTehCgRemxn++v6U2wCbBYHs mewMhQgDm2FMoqCBK+jAvxU= =AED0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051011064014.GA76710>