From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Dec 10 20:04:48 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A41D5E99BFC for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:04:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 914B78071A for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:04:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id vBAK4mop029854 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:04:48 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 224218] Kernel panic in SCTP/IpV6 server mode Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:04:48 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: cem@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:04:48 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D224218 --- Comment #12 from Conrad Meyer --- (In reply to Shreesh Holla from comment #11) Well, pointers and native words *are* smaller on i386, so it isn't totally unreasonable for the stack size to be smaller than amd64. Also, i386-only devices tend to be older and have smaller amounts of memory available. I think the long term solution is fixing the SCTP (and other) code to not u= se so much stack memory. However, bumping KSTACK_PAGES to maybe 3 by default = on i386 could be reasonable. I don't remember the resolution of the last argu= ment about KSTACK_PAGES on x86 :-). --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=