From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752245Ab1AVVkx (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jan 2011 16:40:53 -0500 Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:44590 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750738Ab1AVVkv (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Jan 2011 16:40:51 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=sbAsotpgK7c++yv+21SlFRiuPX/rCedRfaJQ4ir9fP402n8XLye3OEa+FhE+LHJG4n eRfTwb4I09enJ16Glqhbs7HN985qU4yoaxleuEBF3mXVbrRJ4DRvtImEM5zCSFD9yoXf UfBMyIFdIcBQ1Nxu85yaRS0XXg4m3FnXfT+KY= Subject: Re: Problems with /proc/net/tcp6 - possible bug - ipv6 From: Eric Dumazet To: PK Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev , David Miller In-Reply-To: <1295731235.2651.66.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <702550.61465.qm@web63902.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <1295686781.2609.37.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1295709344.2651.55.camel@edumazet-laptop> <115440.16148.qm@web63902.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <1295731235.2651.66.camel@edumazet-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 22:40:44 +0100 Message-ID: <1295732444.2651.68.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Le samedi 22 janvier 2011 à 22:20 +0100, Eric Dumazet a écrit : > Le samedi 22 janvier 2011 à 11:42 -0800, PK a écrit : > > Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > > > I had some incidents, after hours of testing... > > > > > > After following patch, I could not reproduce it. > > > > > > Looks like that patch solved the /proc/net/tcp6 problem. The causal commit was > > the one you identified... confirmed with bisect. > > > > These warnings show up when I run the script (or I presume any tcp6 connection > > flooder) with /proc/sys/net/tcp/ipv4/tcp_tw_recycle enabled. There's textual > > corruption of the traces a lot of the time. Here's a sample trace that doesn't > > appear to be corrupt. All the warnings I've seen are from route.c:209, and I > > don't see how that would cause memory corruption. > > Thats a different isse, already reported, under investigation. > > David did some changes recently > > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/179874 > > > In my testings, I even have crashes in cleanup_once() if I enable /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_tw_recycle