[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#291940: marked as done (kernel-source-2.6.10: IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnel hangs at shutdown, "Waiting for <dev> to become free")



Your message dated Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:30:15 +0200
with message-id <20050812103015.GN30206@baikonur.stro.at>
and subject line unregister_netdevice: waiting for ... to become free
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Jan 2005 03:33:10 +0000
>From sihde@cs.stanford.edu Sun Jan 23 19:33:10 2005
Return-path: <sihde@cs.stanford.edu>
Received: from dsl081-048-014.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net (ns1.hamachi.us) [64.81.48.14] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1CsuyU-00026J-00; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:33:10 -0800
Received: by ns1.hamachi.us (Postfix, from userid 2513)
	id 374D23812B; Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:33:09 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Steven Ihde <sihde@cs.stanford.edu>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: kernel-source-2.6.10: IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnel hangs at shutdown,
 "Waiting for <dev> to become free"
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.5
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:33:09 -0800
Message-Id: <20050124033309.374D23812B@ns1.hamachi.us>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: kernel-source-2.6.10
Version: 2.6.10-4
Severity: important

My IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnel causes 2.6.10 to hang on shutdown (every time).
The tunnel is named henet0; the message printed over and over is:

unregister_netdevice: waiting for henet0 to become free. Usage count = 1

I verified that the hang also happens with 2.6.10 vanilla (i.e.,
Debian patches removed).  It worked fine with 2.6.8 (Debian).

Apparently there were issues with unregister_netdevice that were
solved previously, but this appears to be a new bug with 2.6.10.  This
has been discussed recently on the linux-netdev mailing list; here are
some links:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdev&m=110585721626841&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdev&m=110476395824647&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdev&m=110405248721053&w=2

This appears similar to Debian bug 291029 but I'm filing it as a
separate bug, because 291029 involves a bridge device whereas this
involves a 6-in-4 tunnel device.  From perusing the discussion on
linux-netdev it sounds like they may be separate issues.

This message on linux-netdev had a patch; it wasn't clear whether it
was supposed to fix this problem, but I tried it anyway and it did
not:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdev&m=110451354301328&w=2

For now, I'm hanging back at 2.6.8 because I don't like the idea that
I can't reboot the box remotely.

Thanks,

Steve


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (900, 'unstable'), (890, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-hamachi
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)

Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.10 depends on:
ii  binutils                      2.15-5     The GNU assembler, linker and bina
ii  bzip2                         1.0.2-2    high-quality block-sorting file co
ii  coreutils [fileutils]         5.2.1-2    The GNU core utilities
ii  fileutils                     5.2.1-2    The GNU file management utilities 

-- no debconf information

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 290964-done) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Aug 2005 10:30:25 +0000
>From max@baikonur.stro.at Fri Aug 12 03:30:25 2005
Return-path: <max@baikonur.stro.at>
Received: from baikonur.stro.at [213.239.196.228] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
	id 1E3Wnx-0003Il-00; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 03:30:25 -0700
Received: by baikonur.stro.at (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id C3ADF5C001; Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:30:15 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:30:15 +0200
From: Maximilian Attems <debian@sternwelten.at>
To: 290964-done@bugs.debian.org, 291940-done@bugs.debian.org,
	296721-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: unregister_netdevice: waiting for ... to become free
Message-ID: <20050812103015.GN30206@baikonur.stro.at>
References: <[🔎] 20050812091928.GH30206@baikonur.stro.at> <[🔎] 200508121254.41034.debian-reportbug@sammal.pp.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 200508121254.41034.debian-reportbug@sammal.pp.fi>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
X-Virus-Scanned: by Amavis (ClamAV) at stro.at
Delivered-To: 290964-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 12:54:41PM +0300, Jukka Suomela wrote:
> On Friday 12 August 2005 12:19, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> > can you still reproduce this bug with newer linux kernel images,
> > like the linux image 2.6.12?
> 
> If I remember right, I never saw this problem with 2.6.11 kernel images 
> from Debian unstable. It just happened on 2.6.10.
> 
> I am sorry I do not have the same network setup any more, so I cannot 
> tell what would have happened with 2.6.12. Anyway, 2.6.12 works fine on 
> my current system.
> 
> Best regards,
> Jukka Suomela

thanks to all your feedback.
indeed the sent patch went in before 2.6.12.
closing therefor.

--
maks



Reply to: