From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 9 12:14:26 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 D66DB16A4CE; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:14:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.cray1.de (i.would.like.to.spoof.my.realip.de [64.27.85.120]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B2943D48; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:14:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ubm@u-boot-man.de) Received: from greatsheep.marines (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.cray1.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA14352; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:14:03 +0200 Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:18:19 +0200 From: Marc "UBM" Bocklet To: current@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20041009141819.52fc0a7b.ubm@u-boot-man.de> In-Reply-To: <20041008031737.GA1027@green.homeunix.org> References: <20041006090104.06710d85.ubm@u-boot-man.de> <20041006154137.GJ47017@green.homeunix.org> <20041006203220.7f8e7b8a.ubm@u-boot-man.de> <20041006192518.GM47017@green.homeunix.org> <20041006215134.GN47017@green.homeunix.org> <20041007010008.15274fbd.ubm@u-boot-man.de> <20041007181852.GA73261@green.homeunix.org> <20041007191757.GB73261@green.homeunix.org> <20041008031737.GA1027@green.homeunix.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [BETA7-panic] sodealloc(): so_count 1 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: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:14:26 -0000 On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 23:17:38 -0400 Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 03:17:57PM -0400, Brian Fundakowski Feldman > wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 03:11:48PM -0400, Vlad wrote: > > > Brian, > > > > > > thanks for your work. Question: is this patch is something I can > > > feel comfortable about trying it on a production server? Did you > > > test it? > > > > It is completely untested other than compilation. I don't have my > > SMP machine with console in front of me to be able to try to > > reproduce the problem, but I believe these changes to be relatively > > safe. > > Okay, now I do; I did a more thorough potential fix -- so if that > worked for you, this should do the same without a socket memory leak. > The life and times of sockets are fraught with peril... > > Ok, I'm running 2 days+ now with the first version of your patch, no crashes so far. Looks like you fixed it :-) Bye Marc