From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 20 10:47:47 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CB9811F; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:47:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4EFAA7E; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:47:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1YDWLQ-000CZz-VR; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:47:36 +0300 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:47:36 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Hans Petter Selasky Subject: Re: [RFC] kern/kern_timeout.c rewrite in progress Message-ID: <20150120104736.GA78629@zxy.spb.ru> References: <54A9A71E.70609@selasky.org> <54B29A49.3080600@selasky.org> <54B67DA7.3070106@selasky.org> <54B7DECF.8070209@selasky.org> <54BADFB3.3030405@selasky.org> <54BE03EB.2070604@selasky.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54BE03EB.2070604@selasky.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: Adrian Chadd , FreeBSD Current , Jason Wolfe , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:47:47 -0000 On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 08:29:47AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On 01/17/15 23:18, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > > On 01/17/15 20:11, Jason Wolfe wrote: > >> > >> HPS, > >> > >> Just to give a quick status update, this patch has most certainly > >> resolved our spin lock held too long panics on stable/10. > >> > >> Thank you to JHB for spending some time digging into the issue and > >> leading us to td_slpcallout as the culprit, and HPS for your rewrite. > >> I had heard rumors of other being affected by similar issues, so this > >> seems like a fine candidate for an MFC if possible. > >> > >> Jason > >> > > > > Hi Jason, > > > > I'm glad to hear that my patch has resolved your issue and I'm happy we > > now have a more stable system. > > > > It was actually a co-worker at work which wrote some bad code which I > > started debugging which then lead me to look at the callout subsystem. > > One bug kills the other ;-) > > > > I'm planning a MFC to 10-stable - yes, and will possibly add the > > _callout_stop_safe() function to not break binary compatibility with > > existing drivers as part of the MFC. > > > > --HPS > > Hi, > > Here is a followup patch for the TCP stack like I mentioned in the > beginning of the work done on the callout subsystem: > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1563 > > If someone has a setup for massive TCP testing please give it a spin. I have on 10.1 (with applied r261906).