Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 04:51:35 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 287244] [fib_algo] inet.80 (radix4_lockless#865) rebuild_fd_flm: table rebuild failed (route add 255.255.255.255/32 -reject -fib 80) Message-ID: <bug-287244-7501-T5orcaJlaQ@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-287244-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-287244-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=287244 --- Comment #2 from Paige Thompson <paige@paige.bio> --- (In reply to Zhenlei Huang from comment #1) Hey Zhenlei, Opie@ from the FreeBSD Matrix actually pointed out to me that in my handful of nets that I -reject, I actually had some overlap with 240.0.0.0/4 and 255.255.255.255/32. that may be the catch I don't have something handy. Ironically I can't repro this at the moment either but I haven't upgraded, I'm still running: FreeBSD zima.netcrave.local 14.2-RELEASE-p3 FreeBSD 14.2-RELEASE-p3 #0 n269524-1eb03b059e5-dirty: Mon Jun 23 13:31:14 UTC 2025 root@zima.netcrave.local:/usr/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/sys/ZIMA amd64 Few things, if you really want to be sure; - I need to make sure I'm using radix4_lockless and it would appear that I am: net.route.algo.inet.algo: radix4_lockless net.route.algo.inet.algo_list: bsearch4, radix4_lockless, radix4, dxr net.route.algo.inet6.algo: radix6_lockless net.route.algo.inet6.algo_list: radix6_lockless, radix6 yeah I haven't tested that full list of routes but I'd have to think why it should matter; most likely what was causing it or what has been fixed is how it handled the overlap between 240.0.0.0/4 and 255.255.255.255/32; the latter being the absolute longest prefix match possible in radix4. On an unrelated note, something that noticed today about radix4_lockless if you try to create more than 64 routes where all 64 have the same length/prefix match but a different gateway you will get: add net 0.0.0.0: gateway 10.96.4.31 fib 31: Argument list too long I think this is a completely pointless thing to do anyway, if there's a reason why I would I'm at a loss for what it might be. But just in case it matters, tell me if this tracks: > radix_lockless Lockless immutable radix, re-created on every rtable change, tailored for a small FIB with <1000 routes. My guess... it does in batches by the length and prefix match; I'm guessing when you have multiple that are the same but a different gateway it does them all at once and the limit for how many it can do at once for me seems to be 64. Like I said I don't think it's terribly important, rather I only ended up here because I was just at a loss for how ospf is supposed to work and had totally forgotten about nexthop and RTA_MULTIPATH being a thing that routing daemons can configure but not route(8). Yeah I mean feel free to close this, if I have the issue again I'll ping somebody and we can pick this up again at least I feel like I have a better grasp of how it works to do a little more research myself next time :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-287244-7501-T5orcaJlaQ>