From owner-freebsd-stable  Thu Oct 12 10:42:31 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 618)
	id C471737B502; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:42:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: xl driver again? Re: mbuf leakage on 4.1.1-STABLE
In-Reply-To: <20001012094914.F272@fw.wintelcom.net> from Alfred Perlstein at "Oct 12, 2000 09:49:15 am"
To: bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein)
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:42:30 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: behanna@zbzoom.net, stable@FreeBSD.ORG, KuriyaKK@cpf.navy.mil
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20001012174230.C471737B502@hub.freebsd.org>
From: wpaul@FreeBSD.ORG (Bill Paul)
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

The xl driver never holds more than 128 mbuf clusters in the receive ring.
Whenever a new packet comes in, it sends one of the mbufs out and replaces
it with a new one. IT DOESN'T HOLD ONTO THEM. It will however complain if
it can't allocate a replacement mbuf. What it will do is allocate them very
fast, and sometimes mbufs do get held inside the kernel for too long a
time. It seems to be worse in cases where you have a lot of UDP traffic
or a large number of open TCP connections. My only suggestion for now
is to add more mbufs by bumping NMBCLUSTERS.

-Bill


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message