From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 15 20:10:28 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E7B0516A4CE; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 20:10:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from coconut.itojun.org (coconut.itojun.org [219.101.47.130])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9E8AE43D4C; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 20:10:24 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from itojun@itojun.org)
Received: by coconut.itojun.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 4B54EB9; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:10:23 +0900 (JST)
To: bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:16:59 +0000 (UTC)"
	<Pine.BSF.4.53.0401152212230.66397@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0401152212230.66397@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net>
X-Mailer: Cue version 0.6 (031125-1130/itojun)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <20040116041023.4B54EB9@coconut.itojun.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:10:23 +0900 (JST)
From: itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 05:11:22 -0800
cc: core@kame.net
cc: ume@freebsd.org
cc: bzeeb+freebsd@zabbadoz.net
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPSec fixes
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:10:29 -0000

> I have built a HEAD kernel from this evening.
> 
> crashing the kernel is more easy than booting it...
> 
> So the big question at the moment is - why will it not happen if I
> remove the unlink call from the spdflush ? What am I missing ?
> If anybody has any more ideas please let me know; I will nost likely
> not find the time for more debugging until sat eve.

	the problem i have with the patch is, i have never experienced the
	symptom with NetBSD.  no panic at all, no funny "SPD entry go away
	when it has to stay" issue nor no "dangling pointer" issue.
	could you show me your script which panics your FreeBSD box?  i will
	try that on NetBSD-current box here.

	there could be some difference in NetBSD kernel code and FreeBSD due
	to KAME->*BSD merge timing, and FreeBSD could have pull in some source
	of instability (just my guess).

itojun