[Bug 283815] listing dev.vgapci.X.%iommu hangs indefinitely on NVIDIA card

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283815

--- Comment #8 from commit-h...@freebsd.org ---
A commit in branch main references this bug:

URL:
https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=6ba2c036a0117ac02f9979b7dc49f15e9c1ea9c9

commit 6ba2c036a0117ac02f9979b7dc49f15e9c1ea9c9
Author: Konstantin Belousov 
AuthorDate: 2025-01-06 23:29:18 +
Commit: Konstantin Belousov 
CommitDate: 2025-01-07 15:34:59 +

pci_find_cap_method(): limit number of iterations for finding a capability

Powered down device might return 0xff of extended config registers
reads, causing loop.

PR: 283815
Reviewed by:imp
Sponsored by:   The FreeBSD Foundation
MFC after:  1 week
Differential revision:  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48348

 sys/dev/pci/pci.c | 7 +--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283815] listing dev.vgapci.X.%iommu hangs indefinitely on NVIDIA card

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283815

Ed Maste  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|k...@freebsd.org
 Status|New |In Progress

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 190787] OCZ-AGILITY3 SSD Not Detected

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190787

Ed Maste  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ema...@freebsd.org

--- Comment #7 from Ed Maste  ---
Is this issue still reproducible on supported versions, and/or has this
hardware been retired?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283747] kernel panic after telegraf service restart

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283747

--- Comment #4 from Matthew L. Dailey  ---
I just had this happen this morning on two machines running 14.2-RELEASE. In
both cases, I had used pkg to upgrade telegraf from 1.32.3 to 1.33.0. After
restarting telegraf, both panicked.

Unfortunately, I didn't have dumps set up properly on either system, but I did
manage to catch a screenshot of the panic on one system. It was a "Fatal trap
12: page fault while in kernel mode" I'm attaching the screenshot and our
telegraf config.

I was unable to replicate this on a VM that had been up for about the same
about of time (~30 days). The only difference I can see if that the VM has no
user traffic, while the others have significant nfs and smb traffic.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283747] kernel panic after telegraf service restart

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283747

--- Comment #5 from Matthew L. Dailey  ---
Created attachment 256501
  --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=256501&action=edit
Screenshot of panic

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283747] kernel panic after telegraf service restart

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283747

--- Comment #6 from Matthew L. Dailey  ---
Created attachment 256502
  --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=256502&action=edit
Telegraf config

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283747] kernel panic after telegraf service restart

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283747

--- Comment #7 from Matthew L. Dailey  ---
I should also add that the two machines that panicked for us this morning were
both Intel, not AMD - Xeon Gold 5215 and Xeon E5-2650v3

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 275086] Old i386 boot: CPU0: local APIC error 0x4 – Cannot boot any longer

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=275086

--- Comment #4 from commit-h...@freebsd.org ---
A commit in branch main references this bug:

URL:
https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=254a2b767f9a39f1541e0a07a70bbe269e86ad70

commit 254a2b767f9a39f1541e0a07a70bbe269e86ad70
Author: Mark Johnston 
AuthorDate: 2025-01-07 17:58:58 +
Commit: Mark Johnston 
CommitDate: 2025-01-07 18:13:54 +

x86: Short-circuit ipi_all_but_self() on UP systems

Apparently this is required on old intel hw, see
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=275086#c3

PR: 275086
Reviewed by:mav, kib
Fixes:  279cd05b7e4d ("Use APIC_IPI_DEST_OTHERS for bitmapped IPIs
too.")
MFC after:  1 week
Diagnosed by:   Ben Wilber 
Differential Revision:  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48361

 sys/x86/x86/mp_x86.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 275086] Old i386 boot: CPU0: local APIC error 0x4 – Cannot boot any longer

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=275086

Mark Johnston  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|b...@freebsd.org|ma...@freebsd.org
 CC||ma...@freebsd.org
 Status|Closed  |In Progress
 Resolution|Works As Intended   |---

--- Comment #6 from Mark Johnston  ---
Reopening since it's a legitimate bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 275086] Old i386 boot: CPU0: local APIC error 0x4 – Cannot boot any longer

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=275086

--- Comment #5 from Mark Johnston  ---
(In reply to ben from comment #3)
Thanks for the analysis.  I committed a modified version of the patch.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 173301] bsdinstall(8): default to SU instead of SU+J

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173301

Ed Maste  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ema...@freebsd.org

--- Comment #4 from Ed Maste  ---
I've suggested removing the advice to disable SU+J on SSDs in
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D48374, with the following justification:

The advice to turn off SU+J for SSDs came in with the original commit
50de5d07d3c5 ("Allow setting of parameters for file systems (e.g. 
softupdates), turn on") without justification.  I suspect this was based 
on some decades-old impression about the way SSDs operate combined with 
early concerns about the state of SU+J, neither of which are applicable 
any longer.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283909] bsnmpget/walk: coredump when SNMPPASSWD is empty

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283909

Bug ID: 283909
   Summary: bsnmpget/walk: coredump when SNMPPASSWD is empty
   Product: Base System
   Version: 13.3-RELEASE
  Hardware: Any
OS: Any
Status: New
  Severity: Affects Some People
  Priority: ---
 Component: bin
  Assignee: b...@freebsd.org
  Reporter: tphil...@potion-studios.com

To repro, with a running bsnmpd listening on default port, not the empty
password env var:

$ env SNMPUSER=bsnmp SNMPPRIV=aes SNMPAUTH=sha SNMPPASSWD= bsnmpget 1
Floating point exception (core dumped)
$ ls bsnmpget.core
bsnmpget.core


Same for bsnmpwalk

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283815] listing dev.vgapci.X.%iommu hangs indefinitely on NVIDIA card

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283815

--- Comment #7 from Anton Saietskii  ---
(In reply to Konstantin Belousov from comment #6)

Thanks for prompt response.
I can confirm that with the patch applied, getting OID in question doesn't hang
anymore -- I can see 'dev.vgapci.0.%iommu: rid=0x100' both before and after
powering down NVIDIA.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.


[Bug 283818] too-large rtmsg.rtm_family for RTM_GETADDR can cause wild pointer ref

2025-01-07 Thread bugzilla-noreply
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283818

--- Comment #1 from Zhenlei Huang  ---
I think we should do sanity check within `rtnl_handle_getroute()`. Meanwhile we
can give netlink client a meaningful error message.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.