From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Oct 13 5: 3:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from point.osg.gov.bc.ca (point.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.102.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F8537B66D; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 05:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by point.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) id FAA03494; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 05:03:10 -0700 Received: from passer.osg.gov.bc.ca(142.32.110.29) via SMTP by point.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpda03492; Fri Oct 13 05:03:10 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by passer.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.11.0/8.9.1) id e9DC36T05668; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 05:03:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cwsys9.cwsent.com(10.2.2.1), claiming to be "cwsys.cwsent.com" via SMTP by passer9.cwsent.com, id smtpdYi5664; Fri Oct 13 05:02:31 2000 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by cwsys.cwsent.com (8.11.1/8.9.1) id e9DC2G413278; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 05:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200010131202.e9DC2G413278@cwsys.cwsent.com> Received: from localhost.cwsent.com(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "cwsys" via SMTP by localhost.cwsent.com, id smtpdJ13267; Fri Oct 13 05:01:33 2000 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 Reply-To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group X-OS: FreeBSD 4.1.1-RELEASE X-Sender: cy To: wpaul@FreeBSD.ORG (Bill Paul) Cc: bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein), behanna@zbzoom.net, stable@FreeBSD.ORG, KuriyaKK@cpf.navy.mil Subject: Re: xl driver again? Re: mbuf leakage on 4.1.1-STABLE In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 12 Oct 2000 10:42:30 PDT." <20001012174230.C471737B502@hub.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 05:01:32 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20001012174230.C471737B502@hub.freebsd.org>, Bill Paul writes: > 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. Is there a reason why the kernel might hold on to mbufs for "too long a time" (I take that to mean longer than it should)? Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA Province of BC To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message