On Monday 27 February 2012 11:47 am, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:47:49AM -0500, Rick Macklem wrote: > > Yes, I can't think of how r229450 would affect "resume". All it > > does is clear the high order bit in an error reply from an NFS > > server, since that bit should never be set in an NFS error reply > > and, if set, it results in an mbuf list being free'd twice. > > True, although even if it helps triggering the real underlying bug, > it's still weird. > > > The bit is erroneously set by "amd" sometimes. If you are using > > "amd", that might be related to the resume problem? > > No, I don't; I've deliberately disabled almost everything. > > > ps: I suspect you saw it, but there was a recent thread related > > to known suspend/resume issues and discussed how they might be > > fixed in the future. Sorry, I don't remember which list or the > > exact subject line. > > Yes, I know what are you talking about. However, I don't recall if > any one was experiencing the same symptoms as I do.
Can you please try head and/or stable/9? FYI, Linux people found that some BIOSes can corrupt low 64KB between suspend/resume, which may cause strangeness like this. I worked around it in head (r231781) and stable/9 (r232088). Thanks, Jung-uk Kim _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
