On 2013/12/18 00:46, RD Thrush wrote:
> FWIW, I built a GENERIC kernel from cvs as of Nov 11 00:00 GMT and that kernel
> did *not* panic. I noticed that although bpf.c was reverted, bpfdesc.h was
> not.
hmmm, bpfdesc.h *was* reverted...
---------------------
PatchSet 3506
Date: 2013/11/11 03:06:43
Author: dlg
Branch: HEAD
Tag: (none)
Log:
replace the user of ticks in a condition like "interval + start < ticks"
with "ticks - start > interval" because the latter copes with the ticks
value wrapping.
pointed out by guenther@
ok krw@
Members:
bpf.c:1.83->1.84
bpfdesc.h:1.18->1.19
...
---------------------
PatchSet 3508
Date: 2013/11/11 16:21:08
Author: sthen
Branch: HEAD
Tag: (none)
Log:
Revert bpf.c 1.84 / bpfdesc.h 1.19 for now, "panic: timeout_add: to_ticks (-1)
< 0" seen by RD Thrush, http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.bugs/20113
where he has a long-running process using bpf which is active at the time of
panic. krw@ agrees with reverting for now.
Members:
bpf.c:1.84->1.85
bpfdesc.h:1.19->1.20
