[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070330150603.edeb2023.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:06:03 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tcp crash in net-2.6 tree
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:43:47 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: "Ilpo_J__rvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:33:28 +0300 (EEST)
>
> > If there is nothing at high_seq (application hasn't given any data to/past
> > that point), the search fails to find any skb and returns NULL... But I
> > have no idea how this can happen? As TCP does after(skb->seq,
> > tp->high_seq) (even in the quoted code block) guaranteeing that something
> > is there after the high_seq for TCP to step temporarily on... So at least
> > one skb should have it's end_seq after tp->high_seq (actually there
> > should be at least two valid skbs after tp->high_seq since the used
> > sequence number space does not have holes), which should be enough to get
> > an existing skb from write_queue_find?!
> >
> > I also checked all call paths to tcp_update_scoreboard_fack to make sure
> > that snd_una hasn't gone past high_seq and found nothing suspicious (and
> > that wouldn't return NULL anyway I think)...
>
> Let's not speculate, let's find out for sure if snd_una is
> surpassing high_seq while we're in this state.
>
> Andrew please give this debugging patch a spin,
OK, will take a look at that this evening, hopefully.
> and also what
> is your workload? I'd like to play with it too.
I use an x86_64 box as a distcc server: shove .i fiels at it, get .o files
sent back. I was using it thusly and noticed that it had died.
Also, an x86_64 box I have here at google was hanging yesterday and that
appears to have stopped since I removed a couple of x86_64 patches and
git-net. I'm in the process of working out what fixed it...
> I've tried to code this patch so that if the bug triggers your
> machine shouldn't crash and burn completely, just spit out the
> log message.
ok.. I don't know how repeatable the distcc crash is. We'll see.
distccd seems to be rather good at triggering networking problems - I think
that's the third one I've seen in the past few years.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists