From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 27 16:42:52 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04577106567D; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:42:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (r2b9.nsu.ru [212.192.164.39]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28778FC14; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:42:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from regency.nsu.ru ([193.124.210.26]) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S23eS-0007vr-QC; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:42:16 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q1RGld2d017105; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:47:39 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id q1RGlYw2017015; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:47:34 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:47:34 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Rick Macklem Message-ID: <20120227164733.GA12679@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20120227152238.GA2940@regency.nsu.ru> <134870242.175249.1330357669745.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <134870242.175249.1330357669745.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: rmacklem@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Resume broken in 8.3-PRERELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 16:42:52 -0000 On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:47:49AM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote: > Yes, I can't think of how r229450 would affect "resume". All it does is > clear the high order bit in an error reply from an NFS server, since that > bit should never be set in an NFS error reply and, if set, it results in > an mbuf list being free'd twice. True, although even if it helps triggering the real underlying bug, it's still weird. > The bit is erroneously set by "amd" sometimes. If you are using "amd", > that might be related to the resume problem? No, I don't; I've deliberately disabled almost everything. > ps: I suspect you saw it, but there was a recent thread related to known > suspend/resume issues and discussed how they might be fixed in the > future. Sorry, I don't remember which list or the exact subject line. Yes, I know what are you talking about. However, I don't recall if any one was experiencing the same symptoms as I do. ./danfe