Bug 294984] Kernel panic in udp6_send when underlying interface
 disappears
Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 17:03:53 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System
X-Bugzilla-Component: kern
X-Bugzilla-Version: 15.0-RELEASE
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: crash
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People
X-Bugzilla-Who: zlei@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: New
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: ---
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-294984-7501-pWNR0FEtmL@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-294984-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-294984-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net+help@freebsd.org>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:freebsd-net+subscribe@freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:freebsd-net+unsubscribe@freebsd.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
List-Id: <freebsd-net.FreeBSD.org>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net+help@FreeBSD.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:freebsd-net+subscribe@FreeBSD.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:freebsd-net+unsubscribe@FreeBSD.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:postmaster@FreeBSD.org>
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D294984

--- Comment #5 from Zhenlei Huang <zlei@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Bjoern A. Zeeb from comment #4)
> What's the reason the change doesn't get merged to stable/15?=20

There're other changes to ifnet. I think maybe it is good time to MFC now (=
 so
we have plenty time to test before next 15.x release ) ?

CC Gleb.

> Given it's an extension to the struct it looks like it is totally fine.
>  Given we allocate within the kernel (and only use the field inside the k=
ernel) it=20
> seems fine even if 3rd party kernel modules would exist which use this.

I think the work on IfAPI has finished in CURRENT and stable/15.  I have al=
so
MFCed some commits related to IfAPI to stable/14. 3rd party drivers are
encouraged to use IfApi but not to talk to ifnet structure. Anyway the chan=
ges
to ifnet is significant and maybe Gleb do not want to make developers unhap=
py
;)

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=