Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:13:26 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: netstat wierdness? Message-ID: <200703261513.27148.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <86r6rt6z27.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <45F388D4.2080900@elischer.org> <45F45172.8070601@elischer.org> <86r6rt6z27.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 13 March 2007 09:41:20 am Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes: > > answering myself.. > > comes from having options LOCK_PROFILING in my kernel. > > adding the same to /etc/make.conf and recompiling netstat and libkvm=20 helped. > > (not sure if both are needed) >=20 > This is very bad. LOCK_PROFILING should have no visible effect on > userland. That is precisely what xinpcb, xunpcb, xtcpcb etc. are for: > to isolate userland from kernel structures. They should not contain > any locks or anything else which would be affected by LOCK_PROFILING > or other kernel options. LOCK_PROFILING (and it's predecessor MUTEX_PROFILING) have always resulted = in=20 variant object sizes in the kernel. They shouldn't be visible to userland= =20 though, and fixing xfoo is the right step IMHO. =2D-=20 John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200703261513.27148.jhb>