Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:02:06 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= <eri@freebsd.org> To: Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r240646 - head/sys/contrib/altq/altq Message-ID: <CAPBZQG3JbsCOMAvYrOjVyRhbS6pfWxnyoaaMO8B%2BHp=pUdXk_A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAE-mSOJFHSSTmOBYYqUQkF3s_zK4aGTz2GXZWRo-ZfzJmhZazQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <201209181234.q8ICYaFB091109@svn.freebsd.org> <CAE-mSOJFHSSTmOBYYqUQkF3s_zK4aGTz2GXZWRo-ZfzJmhZazQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The issue is that this hides the problem per se. The ioctl and pfctl loading of ruleset is not ready for handling failures here! /me Does not understand why people do not ask for review first? On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Sergey Kandaurov <pluknet@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 18 September 2012 16:34, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> wrote: >> Author: glebius >> Date: Tue Sep 18 12:34:35 2012 >> New Revision: 240646 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/240646 >> >> Log: >> Do more than r236298 did in the projects/pf branch: use M_NOWAIT in >> altq_add() and its descendants. Currently altq(4) in FreeBSD is configured >> via pf(4) ioctls, which can't configure altq(4) w/o holding locks. >> Fortunately, altq(4) code in spife of using M_WAITOK is ready to receive >> NULL from malloc(9), so change is mostly mechanical. While here, utilize >> M_ZERO instead of bzero(). >> >> A large redesign needed to achieve M_WAITOK usage when configuring altq(4). >> Or an alternative (not pf(4)) configuration interface should be implemented. >> >> Reported by: pluknet > > Actually Kim Culhan was initial reporter. > I just reposted the problem closer to glebius and pointed out the roots. > > -- > wbr, > pluknet -- Ermal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPBZQG3JbsCOMAvYrOjVyRhbS6pfWxnyoaaMO8B%2BHp=pUdXk_A>