[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A84478F.5010808@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:04:15 -0400
From: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
To: John Dykstra <john.dykstra1@...il.com>
CC: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, mangoo@...g.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: WARNING: at net/ipv4/af_inet.c:155 inet_sock_destruct+0x122/0x13a()
John Dykstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 16:00 -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> BTW, I've seen the same issue in 2.6.28 and 2.6.29 while doing a bunch
>> of NFS-over-UDP testing. I've seen the issue reported in 2.6.27 as well,
>> but it went by ignored. It's not easy to reproduce as it seems like it
>> requires quite a bit traffic over over multiple interfaces.
>
> I've been unable to reproduce it so far. Has bonding always been
> present in the cases you've seen, or are multiple independent interfaces
> sufficient?
Bonding wasn't used in this case, ie. no bonding interfaces were configured.
>
> In the case you reported initially, openvpn was using UDP, but the peer
> was dead, so there presumably wasn't much traffic from that app. Was
> there lots of NFS-over-UDP traffic also going on?
The openvpn case wasn't mine. I didn't use any vpn traffic. Just 2
systems back-to-back with NFS traffic between them.
Yes, there was a lot of NFS over UDP traffic and not much other UDP traffic.
>
> Where was the independent report on 2.6.27
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/22887
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2008/11/26/4244994
-vlad
>
> -- John
>
--
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