Hi, Kamigishi Rei wrote: > Hello, hope you're having a nice day, > > I've been testing my system mostly to check if ZFS in -current is > stable, however so far I've been getting kernel panics in every other > area except ZFS. This time it's tcp_sack.c according to the panic > message, inside [intr]. lol, handy! > > fujibayashi_at_ameagari ~ % uname -a > FreeBSD ameagari.fujibayashi.jp 8.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT #1 > r194546: Thu Jun 25 19:44:18 JST 2009 > root_at_ameagari.fujibayashi.jp:/usr/src/sys/amd64/compile/Ameagari amd64 > > panic: tcp_sack_globalholes >= 0 > cpuid = 0 > KDB: enter: panic > [thread pid 12 tid 100005] > Stopped at kdb_enter+0x3d: movq $0,0x682580(%rip) > db> bt > Tracing pid 12 tid 100005 td 0xffffff0001320000 > kdb_enter() at kdb_enter+0x3d > panic() at panic+0x17b > tcp_sackhole_remove() at tcp_sackhole_remove+0xc7 > tcp_free_sackholes() at tcp_free_sackholes+0x48 > tcp_timer_rexmt() at tcp_timer_rexmt+0xb3 > softclock() at softclock+0x291 > intr_event_execute_handlers() at intr_event_execute_handlers+0x68 > ithread_loop() at ithread_loop+0xb2 > fork_exit() at fork_exit+0x12a > fork_trampoline() at fork_trampoline+0xe > --- trap 0, rip = 0, rsp = 0xffffff8000026d40, rbp = 0 --- > db > > I'm not intimately familiar with our SACK implementation, and these things are often extremely painful to track down. First step: is the panic reproducible? > No core saved - when I tried to get it to save the core, it just raised > fatal trap 12 (page fault) and got a general protection fault afterwards. > Any ideas? How did you try to get it to save the core? A dump would be very useful to have around. Cheers, LawrenceReceived on Mon Jun 29 2009 - 12:22:06 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:50 UTC