Dpinger causing crash on apu2 ?

skyeci

no probs, here you go. I did submit these via the auto up-loader as I thought it might help.

Be good to get some feedback/advice as I don't really want to roll back at the moment unless this is related to the hardware.

Many thanks

crash1.txt
crash2.txt

jimp

db:0:kdb.enter.default>  bt
Tracing pid 13593 tid 100237 td 0xfffff80075c5e500
sbcut_internal() at sbcut_internal+0x70/frame 0xfffffe01206b36c0
sbdestroy() at sbdestroy+0x18/frame 0xfffffe01206b36e0
sofree() at sofree+0x22a/frame 0xfffffe01206b3710
soclose() at soclose+0x502/frame 0xfffffe01206b3750
_fdrop() at _fdrop+0x1a/frame 0xfffffe01206b3770
closef() at closef+0x2d4/frame 0xfffffe01206b3800
fdescfree_fds() at fdescfree_fds+0x7d/frame 0xfffffe01206b3840
fdescfree() at fdescfree+0x6a2/frame 0xfffffe01206b3900
exit1() at exit1+0x73a/frame 0xfffffe01206b3980
sys_sys_exit() at sys_sys_exit+0xd/frame 0xfffffe01206b3990
amd64_syscall() at amd64_syscall+0x4ce/frame 0xfffffe01206b3ab0
Xfast_syscall() at Xfast_syscall+0xfb/frame 0xfffffe01206b3ab0

Seems familiar but I'm not finding anything on it right away. It's close to https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/4689 but not quite the same.

And there aren't any notable errors in the message buffer from the crash either, just the panic message.

skyeci

ok thanks, I am going to run a ram test in the day or 2 just to check that out. It already has had a new SSD just in case but its still happening

skyeci

@hda:

I have an APU2B2 fw(160311) running 2.4B (20161231) fine.
And/but I use dpinger settings relaxed, Probe I=1500; Loss I=7500; Alert I=3000.

thanks I have input your settings just in case it helps..

chrcoluk

did you test your ram out?

skyeci

No not yet but thats the first job this weekend. Then if thats ok I might roll back to 2.32 just to see if it crashes again as supplier wont change unless on 2.32. :(

chrcoluk

for reference I have had no more panic's I do now have my igb set to only use one queue tho.

if you want to see if reducing igb queues stabilises your box then add this line to /boot/loader.conf.local and reboot

hw.igb.num_queues=1

odd supplier trusts 2.3 but not 2.4 as neither is a stable version.

skyeci

Thanks. Might try this at some point.

8 hour ram test - 3 full passes with no errors so time to rebuild as 2.3.2 as requested and take it from there.

chpalmer

@chrcoluk:

odd supplier trusts 2.3 but not 2.4 as neither is a stable version.

2.3 has been quite stable here on all my boxes. My customers would have fled long ago if it were not the case. But I have not lost one account.

2.4 is not to release state yet so any "supplier" would play it safe by avoiding it.

phil.davis

@chpalmer:

@chrcoluk:

odd supplier trusts 2.3 but not 2.4 as neither is a stable version.

2.3 has been quite stable here on all my boxes. My customers would have fled long ago if it were not the case. But I have not lost one account.

2.4 is not to release state yet so any "supplier" would play it safe by avoiding it.

Need to specify which 2.3 - 2.3.2-p1 is the stable official release. 2.3.3-DEVELOPMENT is (as it says) a development build, but actually it has all the fixes and many of the "little" new front-end things that are in 2.40-BETA, it is still called DEVELOPMENT because there is no decision yet about if, how or when it may actually become a release for the 2.3.* series. 2.3.3-DEVELOPMENT should not have "underlying" regressions, since it is built on FreeBSD 10.3 that is proven in 2.3.2-p1 (although various ports of underlying stuff have been updated into the 2.3.3-DEVELOPMENT builds).

skyeci

The supplier sent me this message

"According to the pfsense download page V2.3.2 is the latest stable version,
please use that one.

https://nyifiles.pfsense.org/mirror/downloads/pfSense-CE-2.3.2-RELEASE-amd64.iso.gz

or

https://nyifiles.pfsense.org/mirror/downloads/pfSense-CE-2.3.2-RELEASE-2g-amd64-nanobsd.im

Any comments on this appreciated

Thanks

phil.davis

That is correct. The latest full installer is for 2.3.2.
After it installs and comes online it will tell you here is n upgrade available to 2.3.2-p1 - you can then upgrade to the "p1".
Full installer images for 2.3.2-p1 were not made.

skyeci

Thanks - as my apu2 unit is serial only will the first link work on serial mode?

Guest

@chrcoluk:

for reference I have had no more panic's I do now have my igb set to only use one queue tho.

if you want to see if reducing igb queues stabilises your box then add this line to /boot/loader.conf.local and reboot
hw.igb.num_queues=1
odd supplier trusts 2.3 but not 2.4 as neither is a stable version.

2.3.2 is classed as such as it does not have the dev label. 2.3.3 does. It is weird as My 'live' APU on 2.4 is pretty much a vanilla install with pfblocker being the only addition. O.K. There are one or two patches in there but that's around the area of the launch of dhcp6c for testing.

I would have said I that in SkyECI's case it's the amount of gaming being done by his offspring, but as the last crash was when they should have been asleep that can be ruled out.

I can honestly say I've only ever seen a crash once and that was when I was moving back and forth between 2.3 and 2.4 - it worked a couple of times then fell over. Now I use my test unit for dev work and leave the live unit pretty much alone.

Guest

In some ways I hope it crashes at 2.3.2 as well because I'm convinced skyeci has a problem unit

As you say we are both solid on 2.4 and I had zero issues at 2.3.3 before I upgraded

skyeci

12 hour mem test =check all ok
Heatsink in place properly
Put original as suppplied ssd back in (crashed on both I have tried)

All done. Installed 2.3.2 -opted for stable in updates and on first internet connection it went to
2.3.2 _1

no ipv6 support with sky in this config but its fine for now to see if goes down or not..

Guest

I'll do a patch for sky for you in the morning.

skyeci

Thanks Mate :) :)

chrcoluk

ok stand corrected with 2.3.2 :)

let us know how things get on with the downgrade :)

Phil.Scarr

Wouldn't this be better in the 2.3 forum? This is the 2.4 beta forum…