From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 27 16:34:49 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C951C16A40B for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:34:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from niclas.zeising@gmail.com) Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A47D13C469 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:34:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from niclas.zeising@gmail.com) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k27so3027015nfc for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:34:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=aSQ8bKYfK590FicvQP6pz5OVioZomckkDBEhfL9nNxucoz+/pNAHxfM3L4IfQl2Rr3MiIE+SUC/4iyqKY0V38/HNRY0EoFbTligMLTRfoh1UXQwh+qGPt65VtM+XJ6UHMyKhtt8dE5OiG+knTTmfYvlscQBABcNGIXDmjNhT8KU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ltqgFdP2xGYfOzSrT8eHKYwt0nhFoCY6l+E3WN0AW4a14+RjmGa9EYiA3ROMxUVYx/yQ10n7MD22I+hbkagF9u4rLk5yps4z4We78iPMMhWTpQDgsmBcr4eeS/Bdq8qSJmkTtR9RIv+dLsyD3bTQlEKxD+qpGJsxW7huR1BWct4= Received: by 10.78.203.13 with SMTP id a13mr3633407hug.1175011805635; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.29.12 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 18:10:05 +0200 From: "Niclas Zeising" To: "Andre Oppermann" In-Reply-To: <46090BA6.5060206@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070324124732.GA767@nagual.pp.ru> <20070325194946.GC79938@kobe.laptop> <200703251620.20879.nb_root@videotron.ca> <20070325202749.GA1503@kobe.laptop> <460705AE.5040107@freebsd.org> <20070327045252.GA3256@nagual.pp.ru> <46099675.3040609@u.washington.edu> <20070327052810.GA772@nagual.pp.ru> <20070327054501.GA1026@nagual.pp.ru> <46090BA6.5060206@freebsd.org> Cc: Garrett Cooper , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest -current complete lockup (tcp changes?) 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: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:34:49 -0000 On 3/27/07, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Andrey Chernov wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 09:28:10AM +0400, Andrey Chernov wrote: > > > >>On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 10:11:01PM +0000, Garrett Cooper wrote: > >> > >>>>The problem is deeper than that ((( > >>>>I still got the same lockup, just with more net activity. > >>>>I even try to completely disable sack, with the same result, so probem is > >>>>somewhere else. Last working kernel still from Mar 22. > >>> > >>>I'll give a CVSup / upgrade a try and see what happens. > >> > >>Additional non-default details from my machine which may (or may not) > >>affect the thing: > > > > > > Yet one detail about lockup: external pings to the machine works in the > > lockup situation, but no any TCP services is available. > > Attempting to press power button to initiate soft reboot says that "acpi > > ... not ready yet". > > This bug is really strange and there is no direct and obvious explanation. > A leaked TCP_INFO lock can't really be the cause of the problem as Robert > explained. > > Could you revert sys/netinet/tcp_input.c back to rev. 1.327 while leaving > all others at HEAD and look if the bug can be reproduced? > > -- > Andre I've had troubles with the recent changes in tcp_sack.c and tcp_imout.c as well. It panics on a "Sleeping while holding non-sleeable lock" I've posted tracebacks earlier on this list (same thread) but I'm at work now and don't have them around to test. The problem might have been solved in the most recent change, but I haven't really confirmed it, only that it takes a longer while for the computer to panic. It was too late last night for any extensive testing. Regards! //Niclas