Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 16:06:43 +0200 From: "Kristof Provost" <kp@FreeBSD.org> To: "Alexander Leidinger" <Alexander@leidinger.net> Cc: "Shawn Webb" <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org>, "FreeBSD Current" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: iflib/bridge kernel panic Message-ID: <B851D1E5-7824-4BD3-A4AF-5F2EDA44D88E@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20200930135225.Horde.nVCxwqfnkoJfolbDU0hqqXf@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <CAExMvskTkVprZsfXHBUv9stpiCo1QBAzoOg1VrWd4kRbz0NyJg@mail.gmail.com> <58CADEBB-64FD-414E-AB19-E4F8D3CABCA5@FreeBSD.org> <20200921121627.3dovpumnl6xub3kn@mutt-hbsd> <7FE1F106-2CEE-4692-95D0-14C5229ED768@FreeBSD.org> <20200928124531.Horde.0EjsBzIG5ktLzby_tFcoPPS@webmail.leidinger.net> <33903BFF-4158-4CD9-AD79-360BCD81F1C9@FreeBSD.org> <20200928164410.Horde.mYBkuEeD_Q6xgnKnwNomv7P@webmail.leidinger.net> <6A5EFCFA-C0DC-4DEF-834B-2F9E4FCC8812@FreeBSD.org> <20200930135225.Horde.nVCxwqfnkoJfolbDU0hqqXf@webmail.leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 30 Sep 2020, at 13:52, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> (from Tue, 29 Sep 2020 = > 23:20:44 +0200): > >> On 28 Sep 2020, at 16:44, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >> >>> Quoting Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> (from Mon, 28 Sep 2020 = >>> 13:53:16 +0200): >>> >>>> On 28 Sep 2020, at 12:45, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>>>> Quoting Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> (from Sun, 27 Sep 2020 = >>>>> 17:51:32 +0200): >>>>>> Here=E2=80=99s an early version of a task queue based approach: = >>>>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~kp/0001-bridge-Cope-with-if_ioctl-s-tha= t-sleep.patch >>>>>> >>>>>> That still needs to be cleaned up, but this should resolve the = >>>>>> sleep issue and the LOR. >>>>> >>>>> There are some issues... seems like inside a jail I can't ping = >>>>> systems outside of the hardware. >>>>> >>>>> Bridge setup: >>>>> - member jail A >>>>> - member jail B >>>>> - member external_if of host >>>>> >>>>> If I ping the router from the host, it works. If I ping from one = >>>>> jail to another, it works. If I ping from the jail to the IP of = >>>>> the external_if, it works. If I ping from a jail to the router, I = >>>>> do not get a response. >>>>> >>>> Can you check for 'failed ifpromisc' error messages in dmesg? And = >>>> verify that all bridge member interfaces are in promiscuous mode? >>> >>> I have a panic for you...: >>> - startup still in progress =3D 22 jails in startup, somewhere after = a = >>> few jails started the panic happened >>> - tcpdump was running on the external interface >>> - a ping to a jail IP from another system was running, the first = >>> ping went through, then it paniced >>> >>> First regarding your questions about promisc mode: no error, but the = >>> promisc mode is directly disabled again on all interfaces. >>> >> I think I see why you had issues with the promiscuous setting. I=E2=80= =99ve = >> updated the patch to be even more horrific than it was before. > > Hmmm.... same behavior as before. > I haven't kept the old version of the patch, so I can't compare if I = > somehow downloaded the old version again, or if I got the updated = > one... > Okay, let=E2=80=99s abandon that patch. It=E2=80=99s ugly and it doesn=E2= =80=99t work. Here=E2=80=99s a different approach that I=E2=80=99m much happier with. https://people.freebsd.org/~kp/0001-bridge-Call-member-interface-ioctl-wi= thout-NET_EPOCH.patch It passes the regression tests with WITNESS and INVARIANTS enabled, and = a hack in the epair ioctl() handler to make it sleep (to look a bit like = the Intel ioctl() handler that currently trips up if_bridge). Best, Kristof
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B851D1E5-7824-4BD3-A4AF-5F2EDA44D88E>