From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 24 23:37:54 2005
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6871216A4D0
	for <cvs-src@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:37:54 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from relay02.pair.com (relay02.pair.com [209.68.5.16])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 633C243D62
	for <cvs-src@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:37:53 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from silby@silby.com)
Received: (qmail 42127 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2005 23:37:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (unknown)
  by unknown with SMTP; 24 Feb 2005 23:37:52 -0000
X-pair-Authenticated: 209.68.2.70
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:37:51 -0600 (CST)
From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050224202018.GA60363@dan.emsphone.com>
Message-ID: <20050224173517.M9200@odysseus.silby.com>
References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050224102854.95733H-100000@fledge.watson.org>
	<20050224202018.GA60363@dan.emsphone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern uipc_mbuf.c src/sys/sys mbuf.h
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 23:37:54 -0000


On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Dan Nelson wrote:

> Nope; that particular panic has not reappeared on my system since you
> sent me that extra M_ASSERTVALID call.  Code knows when it's being
> watched.  Probably unrelated, but I have not seen a TX underrun error
> since Jan 31, and I had been getting a couple every week before that.

It's interesting that you say that...

>From what I recall, TX underrun errors occur when a burst of packets get 
sent to the NIC driver.  So, since you haven't seen one, that tells me 
that whatever app (maybe a change in the TCP stack?) which was sending the 
burst of packets is gone, and you're therefore not stressing the network 
card/driver anymore.  Which is why you're not running into whatever 
problem had been occuring.

Oh well.

Mike "Silby" Silbersack