Re: Possible bug? DOM-U network stopped working after fatal error reported in DOM0

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 12:13:04PM +0100, Niklas Hallqvist wrote:
> > On 14 Dec 2022, at 07:16, G.R. <firemeteor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 8:37 PM Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> Roger.
> >>>> Hi Roger, any news for the upstream fix? I haven't heard any news 
> >>>> since...
> >>>> The reason I came back to this thread is that I totally forgot about
> >>>> this issue and upgraded to FreeNAS 13 only to rediscover this issue
> >>>> once again :-(
> >>>> 
> >>>> Any chance the patch can apply on FreeBSD 13.1-RELEASE-p1 kernel?
> >>>> 
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> G.R.
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Hi,
> >>> 
> >>> I want to confirm that the patch in an official release would make quite 
> >>> some people very happy. E.g. among OPNsense users, there are some who
> >>> suffer from the network issue [1]. FWIW, I compiled a kernel including 
> >>> Roger's patch, and it seems to be working without trouble in my OPNsense 
> >>> DomU.
> >> 
> >> Hello to both,
> >> 
> >> Sorry, I completely dropped the ball on that patch, didn't even
> >> remember I had it pending :(.
> >> 
> >> Will do a build test with it and commit later today, I don't think I
> >> will get any feedback, and it seems to improve the situation for your
> >> use-cases.
> > 
> > Hi Roger,
> > Just another query of the latest status. It'll be great if you can
> > share a link to the upstream commit.
> > I'm thinking of asking for a back-port of your fix to the FreeNAS
> > community, assuming it will take a long time to roll out otherwise.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > G.R.
> > 
> >> 
> >> Thanks, Roger.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Hi everyone!
> 
> So did anything ever happen on this?  I find myself in the same situation 
> with TrueNAS core 13, and can’t see any signs of changes in the FreeBSD 13 
> branches.

Hello,

I don't think the change is suitable to backport, it's IMO too
intrusive and risky.  It was committed late 2022, and it's in 14.0:

commit dabb3db7a817f003af3f89c965ba369c67fc4910
Author: Roger Pau Monné <royger@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:   Thu Nov 3 13:29:22 2022 +0100

    xen/netfront: deal with mbuf data crossing a page boundary

    There's been a report recently of mbufs with data that crosses a page
    boundary. It seems those mbufs are generated by the iSCSI target
    system:

    https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2021-12/msg01581.html

    In order to handle those mbufs correctly on netfront use the bus_dma
    interface and explicitly request that segments must not cross a page
    boundary. No other requirements are necessary, so it's expected that
    bus_dma won't need to bounce the data and hence it shouldn't
    introduce a too big performance penalty.

    Using bus_dma requires some changes to netfront, mainly in order to
    accommodate for the fact that now ring slots no longer have a 1:1
    match with mbufs, as a single mbuf can use two ring slots if the data
    buffer crosses a page boundary. Store the first packet of the mbuf
    chain in every ring slot that's used, and use a mbuf tag in order to
    store the bus_dma related structures and a refcount to keep track of
    the pending slots before the mbuf chain can be freed.

    Reported by: G.R.
    Tested by: G.R.
    MFC: 1 week
    Differential revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D33876

TrueNAS/OOPNsense might consider picking it up themselves.

Thanks, Roger.