From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 21 23:07:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D464016A4DE for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:07:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mattjreimer@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.181]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7669E43D46 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:07:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mattjreimer@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id b36so1367131pyb for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:07:58 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=EvH94dAxnaZVBBNR+Sq9Wjo1g4u7Ru21B8lZ6sUqYjcPC4e54qzk+A/TJ87r5kDimL9rq+pHrqiKCjd4ypb4Dm4jxBG3F+1RVNO6RgdSVz3ZgsXxF2U1Fq6/4eRE2lG8zkUr+L4LhfbB36ViLcCMDK1RD/blTRVOaz+mlX+SGY4= Received: by 10.35.18.18 with SMTP id v18mr2094502pyi; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:06:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.63.7 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:06:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 16:06:26 -0700 From: "Matt Reimer" To: net@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Cc: Subject: What should happen when mbufs/mbuf clusters are exhausted? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 23:07:58 -0000 What should happen when mbufs/mbuf clusters are exhausted? Are packets dropped, does the kernel panic, or hang, or ...? Does RELENG_4 behave differently than RELENG_6 or HEAD when mbufs/clusters are exhausted? I know that 5.3 and later allocate and free mbufs/clusters dynamically, but are these newer versions more robust in the face of allocation failures? I thought I read once that they were, but I would like to make sure. Thanks in advance. Matt