From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 25 22:16:57 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD55516A41F for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:16:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: from relay01.pair.com (relay01.pair.com [209.68.5.15]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3888A43D49 for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:16:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: (qmail 95107 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2005 22:16:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (unknown) by unknown with SMTP; 25 Jun 2005 22:16:55 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:16:39 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Peter Holm In-Reply-To: <20050625214503.GA25550@peter.osted.lan> Message-ID: <20050625171336.H935@odysseus.silby.com> References: <20050624212729.C537@odysseus.silby.com> <20050625133052.GA23599@peter.osted.lan> <1437.64.215.82.94.1119717536.squirrel@webmail2.pair.com> <20050625173217.GA24306@peter.osted.lan> <2565.64.215.82.94.1119729121.squirrel@webmail1.pair.com> <20050625214503.GA25550@peter.osted.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: current@freebsd.org, Thierry Herbelot Subject: Re: Mbuf double-free guilty party detection patch X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:16:57 -0000 On Sat, 25 Jun 2005, Peter Holm wrote: > Maybe a panic is better: I got quite a few before I had to reset the > box: > > 71 This memory last freed by: 0 > 18 This memory last freed by: 0x800 > 17 This memory last freed by: 0xdeadc0df > 17 This memory last freed by: 0x1 Well, all of those are bad addresses due to the buggy first patch. Try the new one I just sent out and see what you get. If looking at caller addresses doesn't prove to be helpful, maybe we should print out the contents of each bad mbuf so that we can try to detect a pattern. > I also added a backtrace and here's the high score: Backtraces in the ctor or fini routine are meaningless, they just point to the next legitimate user of a mbuf, not the user who previously freed it (and then presumably used it after freeing it.) Mike "Silby" Silbersack