From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 21 00:10:17 2009 Return-Path: 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 77E421065693 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:10:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stef-list@memberwebs.com) Received: from mx.npubs.com (mail.npubs.com [94.75.203.100]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ECA88FC52 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:10:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx.npubs.com (avhost [94.75.203.103]) by mx.npubs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DD783039807; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:10:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sqlserver1 (unknown [74.82.45.12]) by mx.npubs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B45D5303970C; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:10:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Stef Walter User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090608) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lev Serebryakov References: <20090820042016.C8F913039754@mx.npubs.com> <1038963609.20090820091230@serebryakov.spb.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20090821001014.B45D5303970C@mx.npubs.com> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:10:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Re: ath0: ath_rx_proc: no mbuf! X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: stef@memberwebs.com List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:10:17 -0000 Lev Serebryakov wrote: > Hello, Stef. > >> ath0: ath_rx_proc: no mbuf! > >> The mbufs are in fact all used up. I allocate more via >> kern.ipc.nmbclusters, and see the same behavior. > Same problem here on 7.2-STABLE, but incresaing kern.ipc.nmbclusters > to 65536 helps. It seems, that when traffic is reauuly huge, system > with ath need a lot of mbufs. At night, when traffic is almost zero, > netstat -m shows a lot of free mbufs and clusters, so it seems, that > there is no mbuf leaks. Thanks for responding. I'll try tweaking some more. Sadly this is an 'embedded' style box that has 64 MB of RAM. According to tuning(7) Having 65536 mbuf clusters would use up 128 MB of RAM :( Cheers, Stef