From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Oct 22 09:37:33 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB86106568F
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:37:33 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from brendan.kennedy@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-ew0-f209.google.com (mail-ew0-f209.google.com
	[209.85.219.209])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FED08FC1A
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:37:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ewy5 with SMTP id 5so4308675ewy.36
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:37:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject
	:from:to:content-type;
	bh=h25qBafJPlqn4sIiKFkFNkV/5cr26eSoAsOfk7cZ3sk=;
	b=wqlirJVB7TmcqrXODHkKV7ysgTV+l5JghxW/7W34srGCmo7BlC8ueRwbyJiLwXgJCs
	va73tFOiCppvRC/FqY7wEX+Uh8iidhJt/c+UJ7LUd2CieoasuTho8KUr+31wtbFx+87H
	VZHMEZWirrpeORM/yQh8a179albQqXwhLPDRc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
	b=OgTQpqfcf7ZC7XoQRGsnLQ0cI3FAe2n9FFBu15Ze3rUm1qXFt+o03h36Wua+Sf0DbS
	AJWzl0YGJpFa2EDpNvgyqJ3l7qpK4xfz4YxNS7bXcbyzvhDzn678m4SOqiPDOTL1LQkW
	AFQCh09EmC4nFHO9MS05omJTutMP1iuY0bU78=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.90.141 with SMTP id e13mr3055622wef.166.1256202408056; 
	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:06:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:06:48 +0100
Message-ID: <db3b765b0910220206t4061b778q788d884b7a039fa1@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brendan Kennedy <brendan.kennedy@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: FreeBSD 7.1 mbuf_cluster memory leak
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:37:33 -0000

Hi all,

I'm having a problem with a crypto driver and netipsec/racoon. At high
data rates (1Gig of traffic, 64bit packets) we seem to be leaking
'mbuf_cluster's. These are allocated/freed by either netipsec I think.
At low data rates, 'mbuf_cluster's are not used, so we don't have this
problem. I just have a few questions around this issue:

1) What is the difference between mbuf and mbuf_packet?
1) Why am I getting mbuf_cluster memory being used when the packets
are so small?
2) Is netipsec grouping the 64bit IP packets into a single ipsec packet?
3) Should my crypto driver be dealing with the mbuf_cluster any
differently than a linked list of data (e.g. should a digest be added
at the bottom of each fragment)?

Regards,
Brendan