From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 6 07:09:41 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AFD16A419; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 07:09:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ianf@clue.co.za) Received: from munchkin.clue.co.za (munchkin.clue.co.za [66.219.59.160]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2D313C46C; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 07:09:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ianf@clue.co.za) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=20070313; d=clue.co.za; h=Received:Received:Received:cc:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:X-Attribution:Date:Message-Id; b=yRI8hcgDE8iUlDKSREBmHR+gakC3mQEAB/kQ1KnY0KMATtTtbss8+i1ECNvWcOs+KZLT2K3A8TJ2CNWQEhpTAfNWy3xcAkngeubYYg0S4siLbSsSgoWieESPWfF4Yp7gfrwQOGr/Dj7VAOv4hE8PDhVUBRVYA+d4hZ0yKVJixvJ9U5P4oIXMIQ6qodweKJnonXJAXCLW0oo5wOu64TfMsw4oaZBxIHoIdPdAPHrKtfCq2iRjlKUBE+aPerVgGCAX; Received: from uucp by munchkin.clue.co.za with local-rmail (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1ITBUA-00005c-Oa; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:09:06 +0000 Received: from ianf.clue.co.za ([10.0.0.6] helo=clue.co.za) by urchin.clue.co.za with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1ITBTz-0006QG-Tj; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:08:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=clue.co.za) by clue.co.za with esmtp (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ITBTy-00056T-4G; Thu, 06 Sep 2007 09:08:54 +0200 From: Ian FREISLICH In-Reply-To: Message from Ian FREISLICH of "Tue, 04 Sep 2007 15:21:02 +0200." X-Attribution: BOFH Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 09:08:53 +0200 Message-Id: Cc: bu7cher@yandex.ru, rwatson@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Panic in ipfw X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:09:41 -0000 Ian FREISLICH wrote: > Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > "Andrey V. Elsukov" wrote: > > > Hi, Ian. > > > > > > > I got this panic yesterday on a fairly busy firewall. I have some > > > > private patches to ip_fw2.c and to the em driver (see the earlier > > > > "em0 hijacking traffic to port 623" thread). I don't think this > > > > panic is a result of those changes. > > > > > > > It occurred round about the time an address was added to an interface. > > > > > > I have a patch that can help you (i guess..). > > > Can you test this patch? > > > > > > http://butcher.heavennet.ru/patches/kernel/inaddr_locking/ > > > > Thanks. Wow, that looks like it touches a lot more than just ipfw. > > It took about 1.5 years of production at 2.3 billion backets a day > > to trigger this condition twice. It's going to be difficult to > > tell if this patch fixes the problem. > > This code is touched by Andrey's patch. I'm going to put that patch > into production tomorrow - this locking issue is raising it's head > too often now. That didn't go too well. The onsite admins messed up the serial console arangement so I couldn't see what happened when things went wrong. But they did. The only difference to the kernel was the inclusion of Audrey's patch. After about 6 hours we started seeing about 90% packet loss. I'm not sure if I'll get another chance to try this patch. Ian -- Ian Freislich