Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:08:07 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sbuf-related panic Message-ID: <1426626487.62241.15.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAG=rPVdSeGf250kBiPnpRkU5krwymUAnE9H5PnVoF3N6sL-4gQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <1426529019.4766.1.camel@hardenedbsd.org> <1426618197.670703.241661961.0D1A6F14@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1426618644.62241.4.camel@freebsd.org> <CAG=rPVdSeGf250kBiPnpRkU5krwymUAnE9H5PnVoF3N6sL-4gQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 12:14 -0700, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > There is still a panic, one that I can't yet figure out why it wasn't > > panicking before my changes, but I'm working on it. > > > > > Can you run the kyua tests on your system? > > > https://wiki.freebsd.org/201411DevAndVendorSummit?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=kyua_jenkins.pdf > > Those tests seem to be reproducibly triggering the problem. > Triggering it wasn't the problem, understanding why it didn't used to fail and now it does was the tricky bit. :) It turns out it never failed before because nobody had tried to use default allocations (pointer and size zero) with sbuf_new_for_sysctl() before, and it didn't fail for me while I was testing my changes because I had commented-out INVARIANTS in my kernel config and forgotten that (doh!) so none of the assertions were actually being tested. So I fixed my test environment, then I fixed the code. Hopefully it's all better now. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1426626487.62241.15.camel>