Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:56:26 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Eugene Grosbein <egrosbein@rdtc.ru> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, Przemyslaw Frasunek <przemyslaw@frasunek.com> Subject: Re: mpd5/Netgraph issues after upgrading to 7.4 Message-ID: <20110411075626.GV84445@glebius.int.ru> In-Reply-To: <4DA2ABFA.7030108@rdtc.ru> References: <4D947756.6050808@freebsd.lublin.pl> <4D9F6C71.1040209@frasunek.com> <4DA171BA.9000507@frasunek.com> <4DA1E39C.9090300@rdtc.ru> <4DA23090.8060206@frasunek.com> <20110411054932.GU84445@FreeBSD.org> <4DA2A5AA.4060802@frasunek.com> <4DA2ABFA.7030108@rdtc.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 02:21:30PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote: E> On 11.04.2011 13:54, Przemyslaw Frasunek wrote: E> >> IMO, any kind of memory allocation code (malloc, uma, netgraph item E> >> allocator) never return EPERM, they return ENOMEM or ENOBUFS. E> >> E> >> So, there is a bug somewhere else. E> > E> > I think so, but for me it still looks like resource shortage. As I wrote E> > before, when EPERM starts appearing, I'm unable to run "ngctl list". E> E> Increase sysctl kern.ipc.maxsockbuf. E> I was forced to rise it upto 80MB (sic!) as 8MB was not enough to me. Ah, I found where EPERM comes from. Will fix it soon. -- Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110411075626.GV84445>