From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 13 22:22:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB3E106567D; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:22:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E078FC0A; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:22:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D745146BB1; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:22:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:22:39 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: <200808132135.m7DLZTeK039233@lava.sentex.ca> Message-ID: References: <200808120059.m7C0xvUH028011@lava.sentex.ca> <200808132034.m7DKY7wm038972@lava.sentex.ca> <7.1.0.9.0.20080813164157.161ba2e8@sentex.net> <200808132116.m7DLGY1f039165@lava.sentex.ca> <20080813212544.GA25915@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <200808132135.m7DLZTeK039233@lava.sentex.ca> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (BSF 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Jeremy Chadwick , stable@FreeBSD.org, Jack Vogel Subject: Re: HEADS UP: inpcb/inpcbinfo rwlocking: coming to a 7-STABLE branch near you X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:22:40 -0000 On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 05:25 PM 8/13/2008, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> > >> > I will try a kernel before the em changes, as thats the only other thing >> > I can think of off the top of my head. > > I commented out em from the kernel and loaded up a previous version via kld, > but still the same thing, although not nearly as much .... > No, its very, very quiet. All the other machines on the 2 networks are just > fine. > > Any suggestions on what kernel to go back to start from ? I'm concerned by the presence of multiple ARP entries for a single IP -- I'll need to reread the ARP code to refresh my memory, but in general I would expect to see at most one in-progress or complete ARP entry for any particular IP address at a time. To me, this suggests a bug -- perhaps a race condition or just a general logic bug. If rolling back fixes it, that is definitely interesting, but we can also debug this in the normal ways and see where it leads us. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge