Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:52:35 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, freebsd-pf@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reminder: NET_NEEDS_GIANT, debug.mpsafenet going away in 7.0 Message-ID: <469D3A23.5000809@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200707172342.39082.max@love2party.net> References: <20070717131518.G1177@fledge.watson.org> <200707172342.39082.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Max Laier wrote: > [ Excess CC-list ... testers needed!!! ] > > On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Robert Watson wrote: >> Dear all: >> >> This is a reminder e-mail that, in the very near future, Giant >> compatibility shims for network protocols will be removed. > > <...> > >> The *only* remaining case I am aware of where removing debug.mpsafenet >> presents an issue is credential-related firewall rules (uid, gid, >> jail). I'm am currently in an active e-mail discussion with the >> various firewall maintainers about how to address this issue; as the >> implementations of these rules violate the global lock order, deadlocks >> occur if debug.mpsafenet isn't set to 1, which causes Giant to act as a >> guard lock preventing parallel lock acquisition in the firewall. >> Hopefully we will have this resolved, in some form, soon. > > What we really need right now, is real understanding of the problem (if > there even is any). So we would like to ask everybody who is able to - > to stress test user/group rules (in pf) or uid/gid/jail rules (in ipfw) > with debug.mpsafenet=1 It is normal that (in an WITNESS enabled kernel) > you get a LOR similar to 14-17 and 32 from [1]. Everything different to > those should be reported. > > If you indeed get a deadlock, please let us know and provide as much > debugging information as you can. DDB's "ps", "show locks", "show > alllocks" would be perfect, but detailed information how to repeat would > be a good start to already. > > Thanks a lot! If you are unable to provoke a deadlock, please let us know > as well. Include a few setup details (ruleset, SMP, special sysctl > settings ...) so we can look for patterns. I've not seen a deadlock, only LOR warnings. > > [1] http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/lor.html >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?469D3A23.5000809>