From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 14 02:10:23 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 45068106567F; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:10:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1.sentex.ca [64.7.153.18]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086778FC1A; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:10:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m7E2AKtL068231; Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:10:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from mdt-xp.sentex.net (simeon.sentex.ca [192.168.43.27]) by lava.sentex.ca (8.13.8/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m7E2AK1V040232 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:10:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-Id: <200808140210.m7E2AK1V040232@lava.sentex.ca> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:10:09 -0400 To: Robert Watson From: Mike Tancsa In-Reply-To: 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 64.7.153.18 Cc: Jeremy Chadwick , stable@FreeBSD.org 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: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:10:23 -0000 At 06:22 PM 8/13/2008, Robert Watson wrote: >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. I blew away /usr/src and /usr/obj and did a full buildworld, buildkernel with date=2008.07.01.00.00.00 in my cvsup file 2008-07-01, all OK 2008-07-13, all OK 2008-07-25, all OK 2008-08-01, 'blammo' So sometime between the 25th and aug1. Just going to try and narrow it down some more. ---Mike