On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 07:48:16PM -0400, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:25:54AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am looking for testers and code review for if_bridge, the bridge > > implementation from NetBSD (and OpenBSD). > > > > The patch and instructions can be found at: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~thompsa/ > > > > Some of these have since been fixed by you or I, but the most serious > is the deadlock caused by not having consistency in data access > between the input/output interfaces attached to the bridge and the > bridge interface itself. It was quite simple to reproduce using IPFW > dynamic rules and two fxp(4). The situation that occurs is the input > path having locked the bridge, then the interface, and the output path > locking the real interface and then trying to lock the bridge. It > can be fixed by deferring the if_start(9), but having not run it with > WITNESS I'm not certain that is the only big problem. > > Ideally, there should be a global bridge-list shared/exclusive lock > and per-bridge shared/exclusive locks. This will require a fair bit > of code churn... but the current state is largely not productionable > on FreeBSD thanks to a locking versus IPL model being used in the > kernel versus the if_bridge(4) code having been structured for IPL. >
Have you looked at the patch above, I have been using bridge-list and per-bridge locks for about a week now. There have been a couple of changes from the original patch you have, are you able to re-test? cheers, Andrew _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
