Re: dst refcount is -1

Possibly this recent patch in master fixes it: d2950278d2 (xfrm: put policies when reusing pcpu xdst entry)

Re: dst refcount is -1

Possibly this recent patch in master fixes it: d2950278d2 (xfrm: put policies when reusing pcpu xdst entry)

Re: dst refcount is -1

On 12/19/2017 07:09 PM, Wei Wang wrote: Would you give more details under what circumstances it happened? Circumstances are unknown as I can't correlate that log line to anything else. If I have to guess, then it has to do with ipsec events. These tunnel tend to go up and down a lot and

Re: dst refcount is -1

On 12/19/2017 07:09 PM, Wei Wang wrote: Would you give more details under what circumstances it happened? Circumstances are unknown as I can't correlate that log line to anything else. If I have to guess, then it has to do with ipsec events. These tunnel tend to go up and down a lot and

Re: dst refcount is -1

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Ortwin Glück wrote: > Hi, > > On 4.14.6 I just got this (on a busy firewall): > [Tue Dec 19 11:15:59 2017] dst_release: dst:9bb7aca0d6c0 refcnt:-1 > > Are you sure the refcounting is now correct? > > Ortwin Would you give more details under what

Re: dst refcount is -1

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Ortwin Glück wrote: > Hi, > > On 4.14.6 I just got this (on a busy firewall): > [Tue Dec 19 11:15:59 2017] dst_release: dst:9bb7aca0d6c0 refcnt:-1 > > Are you sure the refcounting is now correct? > > Ortwin Would you give more details under what circumstances

dst refcount is -1

Hi, On 4.14.6 I just got this (on a busy firewall): [Tue Dec 19 11:15:59 2017] dst_release: dst:9bb7aca0d6c0 refcnt:-1 Are you sure the refcounting is now correct? Ortwin

dst refcount is -1

Hi, On 4.14.6 I just got this (on a busy firewall): [Tue Dec 19 11:15:59 2017] dst_release: dst:9bb7aca0d6c0 refcnt:-1 Are you sure the refcounting is now correct? Ortwin