On 21/06/17(Wed) 17:42, Marko Cupać wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:22:46 +0200 > Martin Pieuchot <m...@openbsd.org> wrote: > > > On 14/06/17(Wed) 16:56, Marko Cupać wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 11:38:46 +0000 (UTC) > > > Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Can you try "sysctl kern.splassert=2" to obtain a backtrace? > > > > > > > > (This isn't on by default as there's a small risk of problems, > > > > though I run this on almost all my routers/firewalls and never > > > > had trouble from it). > > > > > > Here's the backtrace: > > > > > > Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: splassert: pool_put: want 0 have 4 > > > Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: Starting stack trace... > > > Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: pool_put() at pool_put+0x6b > > > Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: pipex_destroy_session() at > > > pipex_destroy_session+0xe4 Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: pipex_timer() > > > at pipex_timer+0x85 Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: timeout_run() at > > > timeout_run+0x48 Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: softclock() at > > > softclock+0x147 Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: softintr_dispatch() at > > > softintr_dispatch+0x8b Jun 14 16:52:05 nat2 /bsd: > > > Xsoftclock() at Xsoftclock+0x1f > > > > This has been fixed by yasuoka@ on Mai 28th. Please try a new > > snapshot and report back if you still encounter similar problems. > > Thanx for info. Any chance to get this as (sys)patch? I'm tracking > binary -stable for my production, I'd rather not experiment with > snapshots as they tend to fix one thing while breaking another.
No it won't happen, this is not critical and the change is too intrusive.
