Andre Oppermann wrote:
Maxim Konovalov wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, 17:15+0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
John-Mark Gurney wrote:
Randall Stewart wrote this message on Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 17:04 -0400:
atomic_fetchadd_int(m->m_ext.ref_cnt, -1) == 0) {
^
This should be 1 not 0.. as apparently fetchadd_int returns the
old value (at least that's what atomic(9) says), which means that
if we ever race on this comparision, we won't free though we
should of...
if we look at refcount.h, it does:
return (atomic_fetchadd_int(count, -1) == 1);
which release a reference and apparently returns true if it needs to
be free'd...
Though the wierd part is that andre, "fixed" it to be 0 in 1.157:
Fix a logic error introduced with mandatory mbuf cluster
refcounting and freeing of mbufs+clusters back to the packet zone.
Honestly I'm a bit confused myself now and have to dig up things from
when I did the change. However I'm certain there was a problem and the
commit fixed it in some way (not necessarily the correct way). Before
the 'fix' there were some larger leaks going on.
So what's the conclusion? Perhaps it's worth to add an XXX comment in
meantime.
Please give me until Thursday to resolve this issue.
Andre:
It is long past Thursday.... any status on this? I have not
seen a commit from you on this... When I commit the SCTP code
(some day soon) then we will have an mbuf leak unless we change
the 0 to a 1....
R
--
Randall Stewart
NSSTG - Cisco Systems Inc.
803-345-0369 <or> 815-342-5222 (cell)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
