[cc: Willy Tarreau]
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:26 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Apoligies if I have submitted to the wrong lists.
>
> Encountered a regression in
> 2.6.32.66 relative to 2.6.32.65.
>
> Crash eight minutes after boot.
>
> Will responded with additional details
> if the OOPS is not sufficent.
>
> Best Regards
>
Did you bisect it?
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 09:00:21AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> [cc: Willy Tarreau]
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:26 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Apoligies if I have submitted to the wrong lists.
> >
> > Encountered a regression in
> > 2.6.32.66 relative to 2.6.32.65.
> >
> > Crash eight minutes after boot.
> >
> > Will responded with additional details
> > if the OOPS is not sufficent.
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
>
> Did you bisect it?
Eric Dumazet notified me that of something possibly similar due to
a mistake I made when backporting a fix by hand.
Please apply the following patch to see if it fixes the problem :
diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
index 5339f066234b..d1e2895bb63c 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
@@ -2136,7 +2136,7 @@ void tcp_send_fin(struct sock *sk)
*/
if (tskb && (tcp_send_head(sk) || tcp_memory_pressure)) {
coalesce:
- TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->flags |= TCPCB_FLAG_FIN;
+ TCP_SKB_CB(tskb)->flags |= TCPCB_FLAG_FIN;
TCP_SKB_CB(tskb)->end_seq++;
tp->write_seq++;
if (!tcp_send_head(sk)) {
Thanks,
Willy
Hi,
I found the patch late yesterday and applied it.
Running fine now for 12 hours under active load.
Recommend the patch be rolled into the tarball,
or a notation added to the release page as this
one has severe consequences.
Thank You!
At 09:49 6/1/2015 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 09:00:21AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
>> [cc: Willy Tarreau]
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:26 AM,
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > Apoligies if I have submitted to the wrong lists.
>> >
>> > Encountered a regression in
>> > 2.6.32.66 relative to 2.6.32.65.
>> >
>> > Crash eight minutes after boot.
>> >
>> > Will responded with additional details
>> > if the OOPS is not sufficent.
>> >
>> > Best Regards
>> >
>>
>> Did you bisect it?
>
>Eric Dumazet notified me that of something possibly similar due to
>a mistake I made when backporting a fix by hand.
>
>Please apply the following patch to see if it fixes the problem
>:
>
>diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
>
>index 5339f066234b..d1e2895bb63c 100644
>
>--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
>+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
>@@ -2136,7 +2136,7 @@ void tcp_send_fin(struct sock *sk)
> */
> if (tskb && (tcp_send_head(sk) || tcp_memory_pressure)) {
> coalesce:
>- TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->flags |= TCPCB_FLAG_FIN;
>+ TCP_SKB_CB(tskb)->flags |= TCPCB_FLAG_FIN;
> TCP_SKB_CB(tskb)->end_seq++;
> tp->write_seq++;
> if (!tcp_send_head(sk)) {
>
>Thanks,
>Willy
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:32:19AM -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found the patch late yesterday and applied it.
>
> Running fine now for 12 hours under active load.
Thank you.
> Recommend the patch be rolled into the tarball,
> or a notation added to the release page as this
> one has severe consequences.
I'll emit 2.6.32.67 with it. I didn't know it was that easy to trigger
it, and since feedback comes slowly on 2.6.32, I was waiting a bit for
more feedback before doing another one.
Thank you!
Willy