From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 29 11:03:58 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14F5088A; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:03:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pawel@dawidek.net) Received: from mail.dawidek.net (garage.dawidek.net [91.121.88.72]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE85E8FC08; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:03:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (58.wheelsystems.com [83.12.187.58]) by mail.dawidek.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D3D58E1; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:02:06 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:05:18 +0100 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek To: "Robert N. M. Watson" Subject: Re: Print a (rate-limited) warning when UMA zone is full. Message-ID: <20121129110518.GF1370@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20121129090147.GB1370@garage.freebsd.pl> <20121129103752.GD1370@garage.freebsd.pl> <20121129105306.GE1370@garage.freebsd.pl> <0D8E588B-6FCB-4B01-9786-B5D42F16C3F0@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DEueqSqTbz/jWVG1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0D8E588B-6FCB-4B01-9786-B5D42F16C3F0@FreeBSD.org> X-OS: FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:03:58 -0000 --DEueqSqTbz/jWVG1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:56:32AM +0000, Robert N. M. Watson wrote: > On 29 Nov 2012, at 10:53, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > > Agreed, especially if reaching those limits is expected by the > > administrator and he is not going to increase them. But in this case it > > would be even better to provide a way to turn them off. >=20 > I wonder if each instance of a 'ratecheck' should come with an associated= tunable/sysctl pair to allow suppression to be easily configured. I almost= find myself wondering if we want something that looks a bit like our stati= c SYSCTL/VFS_SET/etc declarations: >=20 > static RATECHECK(..., "foo.bar.baz", ...); >=20 > Unfortunately, the tunable/sysctl mismatch makes it slightly awkward sinc= e you'd need to declare both, but I think probably worthwhile. I'm afraid you lost me here. Tunable/sysctl name is not related in any way with the warning we are printing. How can you tell kern.ipc.maxsockets affects limits of eight different UMA zones? Also rate-limiting is not only used to print warnings, current ppsratecheck() function just answer the question if the limit should be enforced (something is happening too frequently) or not. --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheelsystems.com FreeBSD committer http://www.FreeBSD.org Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! http://tupytaj.pl --DEueqSqTbz/jWVG1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlC3QW0ACgkQForvXbEpPzSulgCfRCPHzNfLeckghq92LSthW13d e6IAn3EkeJUrm3uCBZl0LD0XGnT5qBm/ =2pUI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DEueqSqTbz/jWVG1--