From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat May 4 16:17:43 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD241592C95 for ; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5528F156 for ; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 9DF581592C94; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:42 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4151592C93 for ; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AFC68F150 for ; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C1B51D688 for ; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x44GHf1q095886 for ; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:41 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x44GHfkQ095884 for net@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 4 May 2019 16:17:41 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 237720] tcpip network stack seized for six hours after large high-throughput file transfer Date: Sat, 04 May 2019 16:17:41 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: rmacklem@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 May 2019 16:17:43 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D237720 Rick Macklem changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rmacklem@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #4 from Rick Macklem --- Since no one else has mentioned this yet... The stats suggest to me that you've fragmented the mbuf cluster memory pool. 9K mbuf clusters are known to be a serious problem, see this recent post: http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?23756.39015.553779.526064 Some net interfaces have a setting that tells them to not use 9K mbuf clust= ers even if the interface is using 9K jumbo packets. If that exists for this net driver, I'd suggest you try it. For some reason, the stats show large numbers of both 9K and 4K mbuf cluste= rs. (The 4K mbuf clusters aren't nearly as bad w.r.t. fragmentation, but mixing them with the 9K ones seems likely to cause fragmentation.) Alternately, I'd suggest you turn of jumbo packets and try it with ordinary 1500 byte ethernet packets. Hopefully others more conversant with this net driver and the mbuf stats wi= ll comment. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=