On 08/01/15 14:46, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On 1 August 2015 at 19:20, RD Thrush <openbsd-t...@thrush.com> wrote: >> >> The patch ran without panic for 20+ hours. >> > > Thanks for testing! > >> I wondered about the removal of the panic() statement so I tried >> another kernel that added the memset() but kept the panic() statement, as >> follows: >> > [snip] >> >> That kernel panic'd as before with "no appropriate pool". > > Well of course. Not all rules are rdr/nat/route-to. > >> Was the Jul 20 cvs commit (panic addition) incorrect? > > It has served it's purpose well: it has found this bug. > But panic'ing here in general is of course incorrect.
Fair enough. I'll run with your patch until a snapshot includes it. >> If not, it appears the memset() addition didn't fix the panic. >> > > It did, clearly. You can run your setup again (-: > >> I was able to take a crash dump with the above change and have >> attached a gdb transcript. The stack is apparently damaged in the >> pf_postprocess_addr() function; however, I'm over my head at this >> point. How may I help further troubleshoot? > > You're slightly overanalyzing here: panic has caught the unhandled > case, but it's not needed per se. Thanks for the explanation.
