Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 09 Jul 2021 14:37:34 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        net@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 257067] panic: Assertion in_epoch(net_epoch_preempt) failed at /usr/src/sys/net/if_vlan.c:1185
Message-ID:  <bug-257067-7501-N3LgnHZ7VU@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-257067-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-257067-7501@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=3D257067

--- Comment #5 from Aleksandr Fedorov <afedorov@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #4)

I think the previous fix closed all similar problems:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D248958 and
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26226

I have not yet found other problem areas in the ng_pppoe(4) code.

The main idea behind introducing NET_EPOCH in netgraph (4) is:
- Data processing (NG_SEND_DATA_ *) should always be in the NET_EPOCH secti=
on.
- Processing of service messages (NG_SEND_MSG_ *) should not be in the
NET_EPOCH section. Because message handling (* _rcvmsg, connect/disconnect
hooks, node constructor/destructor) allows sleeping and other forbidden
operations for NET_EPOCH section.

But on many nodes, some data processing routines generate messages, and mes=
sage
processing routines generate data (as in this PR).

Unfortunately, there are cases that are not so easy to fix without reworking
ng_base.c.

--=20
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-257067-7501-N3LgnHZ7VU>