Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:35:23 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@reeBSD.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic: tcp_input: TCPS_LISTEN in netinet/tcp_input.c:1016 Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050216143254.87356Q-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <421358FB.9090000@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Andre Oppermann wrote: > I was pulling out my hair because I couldn't figure out how this can > happen. I never thought about the socket layer and was only tracing and > following the TCP code back and forth and back and forth... Really good > catch! I went to bed last night after a few hours of trying to figure out how on earth we could be racing during socket allocation and getting our tcpcb's mixed up, but had just noticed that the contents of the tcpcb were basically in the "I've just been listen()'d" state, and the socket looked like it was exposed to the user (no SS_NOFDREF) but otherwise unused. I woke up in the morning thinking "Oh. I guess it's still being set up to listen, which would explain the lack of SO_ACCEPTCONN". I guess sleeping on things really does help :-). Not sure if you saw my post on freebsd-net this afternoon, but if you have a moment, I'd like your insight into the conditional setting of SO_ACCEPTCONN in solisten(), which would be nice to get rid of if it's unneeded. Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050216143254.87356Q-100000>