From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 13 17:19:13 2004 Return-Path: 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 2F37D16A4CE for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:19:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from outbound0.sv.meer.net (outbound0.sv.meer.net [205.217.152.13]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EAEF43D2D for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:19:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mail.meer.net (mail.meer.net [209.157.152.14]) i7DHIbr8017219; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:18:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (fa0-1-wlan-rtr.corp.yahoo.com [216.145.49.5]) by mail.meer.net (8.12.10/8.12.2/meer) with ESMTP id i7DHIGjx068001; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:18:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:18:16 -0700 Message-ID: From: "George V. Neville-Neil" To: Max Laier In-Reply-To: <200408131618.43129.max@love2party.net> References: <20040812171410.GA91666@neo.redjade.org> <20040813073216.3f09e114.sebastian.ssmoller@gmx.net> <200408131618.43129.max@love2party.net> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.10.1 (Watching The Wheels) SEMI/1.14.5 (Awara-Onsen) FLIM/1.14.5 (Demachiyanagi) APEL/10.5 Emacs/21.2 (powerpc-apple-darwin) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.5 - "Awara-Onsen") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Panic in nd6_slowtimo() X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:19:13 -0000 At Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:18:32 +0200, Max Laier wrote: > Obviously it does. The original report mentions current as of > yesterday (Aug, 12th). Oops, I only noted the January date. > > trying to fix up the IPv6 code. I am running IPv6 on several machines > > (CURRENT and STABLE) and have yet to see this. I am also using > > neighbor discovers (nd) extensively. > > Could you also load pf in one of these boxes, just to check if it > triggers the panic? I'll try that tonight (PDT). > Anyhow, the timeout is initialized unconditionally and it runs > unconditionally over all interfaces present. At least that's my > reading so far. The only problem I see is the mutex-trickery in > if_attachdomain1. But as the original report indicates > if_afdata_initialized was set to 1, so the last culprit can be in > the domain.dom_ifattach() function. I'll check. Later, George