From owner-freebsd-questions Tue May 15 23:25:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from lamborghini.indocyber.com (lamborghini.indocyber.com [202.180.0.86]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A9D1537B422 for ; Tue, 15 May 2001 23:25:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from john@office.naver.co.id) Received: (qmail 25159 invoked from network); 16 May 2001 06:18:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dante.naver.co.id) (202.158.92.193) by lamborghini.indocyber.com with SMTP; 16 May 2001 06:18:38 -0000 Received: by dante.naver.co.id (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0C5EDBDF2A; Wed, 16 May 2001 13:25:38 +0700 (JAVT) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:25:38 +0700 From: John Indra To: Brian O'Shea Cc: Matthew Emmerton , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: My network is dead because of this program :( Message-ID: <20010516132538.C80431@office.naver.co.id> Mail-Followup-To: Brian O'Shea , Matthew Emmerton , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010516092035.A79109@office.naver.co.id> <00b401c0ddb2$23b2c710$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <20010515230354.A62767@shaolin.hq.netapp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010515230354.A62767@shaolin.hq.netapp.com>; from boshea@ricochet.net on Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:03:54PM -0700 X-Mailer: Mutt 1.2.5i on FreeBSD 5.0-20010210-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:03:54PM -0700, Brian O'Shea wrote: >Probably because the program is forking and you can't kill it's children >fast enough. You are probably right... >resources get exhausted. Take a look at the attachment for more >details. Thank you for your detailed guide to trace what the program does. I don't know how to use gdb :) I want to add some point that I forgot to mention... >Child calls socketpair with the following arguments: > int socketpair(int domain, int type, int protocol, int *sv) > int domain = 0x1 (AF_LOCAL) > int type = 0x1 (SOCK_STREAM) > int protocol = 0x0 (typically 0 for AF_LOCAL) > int *sv = address of an array of two file descriptors > >Push arguments to socketpair onto stack and call socketpair again: > >0x80486a8 : lea 0xfffffff8(%ebp),%eax >0x80486ab : push %eax >0x80486ac : push $0x0 >0x80486ae : push $0x1 >0x80486b0 : push $0x1 >0x80486b2 : call 0x80484e0 >0x80486b7 : add $0x10,%esp >0x80486ba : mov %eax,%eax > >Note: It's strange that the address family is AF_LOCAL. I wouldn't think >this would cause the problems that you are seeing with the xl0 device, >unless AF_LOCAL sockets consume some of the same resources that this driver >also consumes, and thus starves it of those resources. I don't know enough >about FreeBSD to tell. I am not sure about this too. But I think I should mention that I am running a jail, and the offending program runs inside the jail. Maybe this can clear up things? /john Live Free OR Die To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message