From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 18 19:00:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0831065679 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:00:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gofd-freebsd-virtualization@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53A838FC1A for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:00:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PJ9Tj-0005VQ-GI for freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:45:03 +0100 Received: from rrcs-208-105-236-250.nys.biz.rr.com ([208.105.236.250]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:45:03 +0100 Received: from danmartinj by rrcs-208-105-236-250.nys.biz.rr.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:45:03 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org From: Dan Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 18:33:22 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 75 Message-ID: References: <201011170627.28025.thierry.herbelot@free.fr> <20101117055208.S24596@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <201011171345.06789.zec@icir.org> <20101117131438.I24596@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 208.105.236.250 (Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.16 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0 Safari/533.16) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:35:30 +0000 Subject: Re: VIMAGE: Freed UMA keg was not empty X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:00:07 -0000 Brandon Gooch writes: > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb > wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Marko Zec wrote: > > > >> Actually, we never seriously discussed or revisited the issue with > >> separate > >> UMA pools for each vnet instance. > >> > >> My original motivation when O introduced separate UMA pools was primarily > >> in > >> making it easier to spot resource leaks, and to prove the correctness of > >> the > >> whole VIMAGE / VNET thing.  Having more or less achieved those goals, > >> perhaps > >> the time has come to move on.  Having said that, and given that the > >> current > >> VIMAGE resource allocation model is far from being optimal (a lot of > >> memory > >> sits reserved but 99% unused, and cannot be reclaimed later on vnet > >> teardown), perhaps it's time that we reconsider using unified UMA pools. > > > > I think there is a misunderstanding here;  it can be reclaimed by the > > time we have the teardown properly sorted out and it will immediately > > help normal non-VIMAGE systems under memory pressure as well. > > The problem is that, at least for TCP (and UDP in one special case as > > I found after lots of testing), we are no there yet. > > > > After that, when it comes to resource usage, I am still wondering how > > trasz' resource limits will plug into that.  By the time we can see > > those coming together we should be able to decide whether to go left > > or right. > > > > I've been running into this memory exhaustion as well, having a need > to stop and start my VIMAGE jails frequently. > > I'm confident that the proper solution will be worked out, but I > wonder what sort of time-frame we may be looking at -- is VIMAGE > expected to be production by 9.0-RELEASE? Also, does anyone know the > current status of trasz's work (which I believe is to be completed > December of this year)? I hope it's still on schedule :) > > -Brandon > Hey there, I have been experiencing a similar problem. I am running Freebsd8.1 64bit Release and after closing my server application I come across this type of message Freed UMA keg was not empty (672 items). Lost 4 pages of memory The more virtual nodes I use the more of these message I have. Someone told me this does not mean anything but after reading this it seems I should be worried. It does show up in my log files as well. I wonder if running a fsck will resolve any issues after I have this problem? Hopefully we can find a solution because I rely on my application heavily. Thanks, Dan