From owner-freebsd-stable  Mon May  6 13:00:51 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA04616
          for stable-outgoing; Mon, 6 May 1996 13:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.barrnet.net (mail.barrnet.net [131.119.246.7])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA04600
          Mon, 6 May 1996 13:00:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17]) by mail.barrnet.net (8.7.5/MAIL-RELAY-LEN) with ESMTP id NAA14210; Mon, 6 May 1996 13:00:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Root.COM (8.7.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id MAA07234; Mon, 6 May 1996 12:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199605061952.MAA07234@Root.COM>
X-Authentication-Warning: implode.Root.COM: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Matthew N. Dodd" <winter@jurai.net>
cc: michael butler <imb@scgt.oz.au>, Charles Owens <owensc@enc.edu>,
        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: MBUFs leaking? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 06 May 1996 09:52:02 CDT."
             <Pine.BSI.3.93.960506094854.13225C-100000@sasami> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Mon, 06 May 1996 12:52:43 -0700
Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>On Tue, 7 May 1996, michael butler wrote:
>> I always thought that whilst there is a definable upper bound on how many
>> clusters might be created, the memory actually used for data was dynamically
>> allocated (and freed),
>
>Indeed.  This seems to be the case.  I'm not sure why I was getting 
>'unable to allocate' errors on the console, but I'm not getting them
>anymore and as a test, I added about um... 1500 IP aliases just
>to see what would happen (nothing really).  The mbuf clusters increased
>and I got no errors, so all is working correctly.  I was a little
>worried when I saw the % used approaching 100 and jumped to conclusions
>about low mbufs and the allocation errors I got.
>
>LART me, and have a good one.

   Are you refering to the "arpresolve: an't allocate llinfo..." messages?
This has nothing to do with mbufs or mbuf clusters. It has to do with a
failure to allocate an ARP entry in the routing table.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project