10.0-RC1: bad mbuf leak?

[Mark Felder]

On Dec 22, 2013, at 19:46, Mark Felder <feld at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> 
> On Dec 19, 2013, at 2:41, Adrian Chadd <adrian at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
>> Hm, try reverting just the em code to that from a 10.0-BETA? Just in
>> case something changed there?
>> 
> 
> finally found some free time today to try to look into this. I was digging into the SVN changelogs of sys/dev/e1000 and couldn't see any obvious changes that I should revert. Instead I went a different route and jumped to HEAD/CURRENT. I'm not seeing the mbufs leaking yet. I'll need another 24 hours to confirm. Hopefully this is a worthwhile clue. I'm a bit surprised nobody else has reported this type of behavior... maybe 10 isn't getting the amount of testing we expect? ...or maybe it's just my lonely, haunted hardware :(

Ok, I feel safe confirming that 10.0-RCs are not stable on my hardware. The mbuf problem went away completely when I jumped to head/current.

Can someone please suggest what patch I can attempt to back out to fix this? I'd like to try to assist in fixing this before 10.0-RELEASE happens or we're going to have some very angry users.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/attachments/20131224/89b2d02e/attachment.sig>