Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Pfsync kernel panic after 2.1.5 to 2.2 to Upgrade - pfsync_undefer_state

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Problems Installing or Upgrading pfSense Software
    73 Posts 13 Posters 23.3k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • M Offline
      Marlenio
      last edited by

      Yes, it's the same error on my carp 2.2.1 with limiters.

      Marlenio

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • F Offline
        flofogl
        last edited by

        Steve,

        I would really like to help but don't know how. Have you been able to reproduce the behavior? I am back on 2.1.5 now and could repeat the update process. Apart from the non-existing crash reports what else would you need or could be useful?

        I have HA and limiters configured and pfSense runs on KVM/QEMU.

        As mentioned before, I got "pfsync_undefer_state: unable to find deferred state" printed in the console after the upgrade process on the backup node (after reboot).

        I got Mathiew's behavior when I tried to restore my 2.1.5 configuration from the backup node on a fresh install with 2.2.1. In both cases, I had to "physically" shut down the machine.

        Florian

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stephenw10S Offline
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by

          So we are able to replicate the continuous log spam but not any sort of crash. Though in our test the box remained running and accessible. We are looking for crash reports really but any info is useful.

          Mathiew, you are seeing that on a single VM? No CARP/HA setup at all?
          That's interesting. What NICs are you using? What limiters do you have defined?

          Steve

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • M Offline
            Mathiew
            last edited by

            One VM only, I tried to import the config file on a fresh pfsense 2.2.1 install, but I had the exact same behavior.

            No CARP/HA setup. I use a a lot of services, openvpn, ipsec, limiters.

            I can send you my config file, if needed. I use E1000 adapter.

            Limiters:
            00001: 700.000 Kbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131073  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65537 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65537 type FIFO flags 0x1 256 buckets 1 active
                mask:  0x00 0x00000000/0x0000 -> 0xffffff00/0x0000
            BKT Prot Source IP/port_ Dest. IP/port Tot_pkt/bytes Pkt/Byte Drp
            80 ip          0.0.0.0/0      192.168.100.0/0        4      336  0    0  0
            00002:  10.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131074  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65538 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65538 type FIFO flags 0x1 256 buckets 1 active
                mask:  0x00 0x00000000/0x0000 -> 0xffffff00/0x0000
            BKT Prot Source IP/port_ Dest. IP/port Tot_pkt/bytes Pkt/Byte Drp
            80 ip          0.0.0.0/0      192.168.101.0/0        4      336  0    0  0
            00003:  1.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131075  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65539 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65539 type FIFO flags 0x1 256 buckets 0 active
                mask:  0x00 0xffffff00/0x0000 -> 0x00000000/0x0000
            BKT Prot Source IP/port_ Dest. IP/port Tot_pkt/bytes Pkt/Byte Drp
            00005:  2.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131077  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65541 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65541 type FIFO flags 0x1 256 buckets 1 active
                mask:  0x00 0xffffff00/0x0000 -> 0x00000000/0x0000
            BKT Prot Source IP/port_ Dest. IP/port Tot_pkt/bytes Pkt/Byte Drp
              0 ip        10.0.17.0/0            0.0.0.0/0    11056 14116413  0    0  0
            00006:  3.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131078  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65542 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65542 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 1 active
              0 ip          0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0      19    1118  0    0  0
            00007:  2.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131079  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65543 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65543 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active
            00008:  1.000 Mbit/s    0 ms burst 0
            q131080  50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65544 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 droptail
            sched 65544 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 1 active
              0 ip          0.0.0.0/0            0.0.0.0/0      79    40016  0    0  0

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • T Offline
              tdale
              last edited by

              @stephenw10 Is there something i can provide to you to help out? We are using two physical machines running two Dell CS24s with dual cpus and 16GB ram each and these are our front line. This is a production environment so i wont be able to make a ton of changes but i can give you information. Just let me know what you need me to post.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stephenw10S Offline
                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                last edited by

                If you see any crash reports then we want to see those.
                Other than that it's odd that not everyone running is seeing the same thing. If there's something unusual in your config then maybe we can try to see a pattern.

                Steve

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • F Offline
                  flofogl
                  last edited by

                  I repeated the upgrade process today after having disabled my floating limiter rules and it worked.

                  However, as soon as I enabled any of them the console didn’t stop printing "pfsync_undefer_state: unable to find deferred state". The first time I wasn’t quick enough in disabling the rules and the machine got unresponsive with no CPU load (no crash report).

                  After a reboot I was able to disable the rules and the machine stayed responsive. I then deactivated “Synchronize States” and enabled the floating limiter rules. Apart from the known “Bump sched buckets to 256 (was 0)” the console remained unchanged. As soon as I activated state synchronization "pfsync_undefer_state: unable to find deferred state" was back again.

                  In contrast to Mathiew I can choose whether to have either HA or limiters.

                  This was done on a backup node, the master still runs 2.1.5.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stephenw10S Offline
                    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                    last edited by

                    Thanks for that report flofogal. All data is helpful.

                    Steve

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • M Offline
                      Mathiew
                      last edited by

                      I removed my limiters rules from the config and it's working, no more psync error…

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • stephenw10S Offline
                        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                        last edited by

                        Mathiew,
                        I have seen one other incidence of this in a single box (not part of a HA setup). IN that case the box previously had a CARP config of some sort and had stray tags in the config file that had not been translated correctly across an update.
                        In that instance it was fixed by enabling HA sync, saving, and the disabling HA sync again. Limiters could then be used.

                        Steve

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • F Offline
                          flofogl
                          last edited by

                          Steve,

                          if you say "fixed" it means that limiters could be used without HA afterwards not together with HA. It is a solution to Mathiew's issue only. Correct?

                          Cheers,

                          Florian

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • M Offline
                            Mathiew
                            last edited by

                            @stephenw10:

                            Mathiew,
                            I have seen one other incidence of this in a single box (not part of a HA setup). IN that case the box previously had a CARP config of some sort and had stray tags in the config file that had not been translated correctly across an update.
                            In that instance it was fixed by enabling HA sync, saving, and the disabling HA sync again. Limiters could then be used.

                            Steve

                            I can try, but I never touch any HA/CARP services on this machine.

                            Thanks for your work.

                            EDIT : I reactivated limiters after doing that and no problem so far.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stephenw10S Offline
                              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                              last edited by

                              Yes, still not fixed (though a problem hasn't yet been found) for HA+Limiters. But we had one other case where a stray HA tag in the config was causing this on a standalone box. Which may be a useful clue in itself because the pfsync interface was not actually configured on that box.

                              Steve

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • F Offline
                                flofogl
                                last edited by

                                Steve,

                                I would also like to thank you for inspecting the issue and I hope Mathiew's efforts will prove valuable. However I don't really unserstand what you mean by "a problem hasn't yet been found"? You wrote you were able to reproduce the behavior but the machine stayed responsive. The question is for how long? Once I was on 2.2.1(upgrade from 2.1.5 wihtout limiters enabled), it stayed responsive in my case too after having re-enabled the limiters, but only for a couple of minutes. After that, there was nothing left to do other than "physically" shutting down the machine (no web UI, no SSH, no console). I would consider this a problem…

                                The upgrade process with HA and limiters never worked for me, the box didn't come back up again. As mentioned before, I can test things if needed.

                                Is this something specific to my setup or are limiters in combination with HA not as common as I thought they would be?

                                Thanks,

                                Florian

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • stephenw10S Offline
                                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                  last edited by

                                  I mean we are not, yet, able to replicate the crashes that you are seeing. We tested for hours with a variety of limiter setups and just saw continuous log spamming. Which itself is not great.  ;)
                                  If you have any ability to run this and deliberately cause it to crash and get us the crash report then we have something solid to go on. Right now it looks like the crashes may be secondary to the log spamming in some way.
                                  I appreciate all the testing that you guys are doing.

                                  Steve

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • M Offline
                                    Marlenio
                                    last edited by

                                    Ho Steve,
                                    i made a new test, installing 2.2.1 on my double CARP front firewall. It's a simple configuration, with a IPSec VPN (with four phase 2) and only watchdog as installed package. It seems to be ok. But in this config i don'y use any type of limiter as i do in my back firewall CARP config. Could it be limiter the problem in 2.2.1?

                                    Marlenio

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • stephenw10S Offline
                                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                      last edited by

                                      This is definitely a conflict between Limiters and pfsync removing either of those will solve it. That's not really a solution though.

                                      Steve

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • M Offline
                                        Marlenio
                                        last edited by

                                        @stephenw10:

                                        This is definitely a conflict between Limiters and pfsync removing either of those will solve it. That's not really a solution though.

                                        Steve

                                        Yes, i think so. Today i installed my back pfsense CARP configuration, the one with the sync problem. First i uninstalled all limiters and all package, then install 2.2.1. It run vithout problem.

                                        Marlenio

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • F Offline
                                          Fira
                                          last edited by

                                          Same problem. Upgrade from 2.1.5 to 2.2.1. Heavily using limiters.

                                          However there's a few differences here:

                                          • No HA/CARP configuration, yet we get the pfsync errors
                                          • These messages occur on traffic from one VLAN whose configuration was changed after upgrade,
                                          • No errors on VLAN whose configuration was not changed since upgrade

                                          I'm not sure to understand why pfsync would trigger at all on one internal VLAN but not another ?
                                          Good luck troubleshooting this..

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • stephenw10S Offline
                                            stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                            last edited by

                                            Hi Fira,
                                            As I advised Mathiew try enabling HA sync, saving and disabling again.

                                            Steve

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.