Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 00:50:50 +0100 From: Pawel Tyll <ptyll@nitronet.pl> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> Cc: Brandon Gooch <jamesbrandongooch@gmail.com>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problem analysys (Re: [Panic] Dummynet/IPFW related recurring crash.) Message-ID: <455301788.20110221005050@nitronet.pl> In-Reply-To: <20110220235540.GA10655@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> References: <410175608.20110220013900@nitronet.pl> <AANLkTimWkWYj=HB5BTM0nwYWgNia-Wq4bYHsRB=OjVP7@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=CLDFGxLQ8rdq3hg0KN9aYZA_YDwDWbqk5gcz2@mail.gmail.com> <1145317277.20110220045434@nitronet.pl> <20110220135855.GA4794@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <288793167.20110220235028@nitronet.pl> <20110220231825.GA10566@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <1167743969.20110221001312@nitronet.pl> <20110220235540.GA10655@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> addresses not needed, thanks. From what i saw in the backtrace, the panic > occurred on an incoming packet on the 'antispoof' option. > The ruleset confirms the backtrace, but since > 'antispoof' happens > to be run on every packet given it is on the first rule, > it apparently has nothing to do with dummynet because even if > you reinjected the packets, they go to rule 34900. > So, i'd still focus the attention on a corrupt interface list. > Sure, that memory can be corrupt by anything including dummynet, > but there is no reason to believe that dummynet is more likely > than other subsystems to cause the breakage. > Unfortunately i don't think I can be of more help. Actually that's a lot of help: new thing to try. I've removed the antispoof rule and automatic reboot. Lets see what comes out of it.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?455301788.20110221005050>