Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:28:39 -0500 (EST) From: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com> To: Ferdinand Goldmann <ferdl@atommuell.oeh.uni-linz.ac.at> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Strange lockups with Dummynet Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0011271825480.57657-100000@jehovah.technokratis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0011272136540.90661-100000@atommuell.oeh.uni-linz.ac.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Ferdinand, A fix for this was recently committed to -CURRENT and yesterday to -STABLE. A related fix is about to be committed but yesterday's fix should fix the problems you describe below alone. I am not 100% certain that this "lockup" you describe is exactly the problem I'm referring to, because this problem usually results in a page fault. If it isn't, I'd appreciate it if you could make sure your kernel is compiled with debugging support and try and get a crash dump. If it's a complete lockup, you're likely to not get anything and in that case, I would begin by checking the hardware. On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Ferdinand Goldmann wrote: > Hello. > > I am experiencing strange crashes on a machine which is being heavily used > as a traffic shaper serving about 300 clients. The machine itsself is just > an old Pentium machine, NICs are: > > tx0: <SMC EtherPower II 10/100> port 0x6200-0x62ff mem 0xe1000000-0xe1000fff irq 11 at device 18.0 on pci0 > miibus0: <MII bus> on tx0 > nsphy0: <QS6612 10/100 media interface> on miibus0 > nsphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto > tx0: address 00:e0:29:39:bb:ab, type SMC9432BTX > xl0: <3Com 3c905C-TX Fast Etherlink XL> port 0x6300-0x637f mem 0xe1001000-0xe100107f irq 9 at device 19.0 on pci0 > xl0: Ethernet address: 00:50:da:0d:a8:a7 > miibus1: <MII bus> on xl0 > xlphy0: <3c905C 10/100 internal PHY> on miibus1 > xlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto > > Occasionally, I see these in the logs: (I hear this is due to hardware being > too slow to respond to feed the NIC, which could be possible (P166)) > > xl0: transmission error: 90 > xl0: tx underrun, increasing tx start threshold to 120 bytes > > I have set the following kernel parameters: > maxusers 96 > options NMBCLUSTERS=4096 > > I beefed up NMBCLUSTERS because FreeBSD ran out of them with the default > setting. > > Currently: > # netstat -m > 637/1472/16384 mbufs in use (current/peak/max): > 187 mbufs allocated to data > 450 mbufs allocated to packet headers > 186/934/4096 mbuf clusters in use (current/peak/max) > 2236 Kbytes allocated to network (23% in use) > > I have configured between 3 and 4 pipes on this machine and declared > a small ruleset which should shape the traffic according to my > expectations. > > Today, I experienced the following: Upon adding a new pipe definition, > the machine locked maybe an eyeblink after the command was set off. > I.e., the machine was not ping'able anymore, and the console was > dead. However, the activity LEDs of the NICs were still flashing. > No kernel entries, nothing... > This has happened already once after rising the NMBCLUSTERS value. > Being paranoid, I have been logging this value to a file, but it does not > seem to rise significantly before the crash. > > [Q]: Can the change of NMBCLUSTERS be the cause for my lockup > problem, or could this be a dummynet problem? How do people running > sites with lots of traffic setting the values of maxusers and > NMBCLUSTERS to be safe, and what would be the maximum value for > maxusers (I heard long it is instable > 128)? > General question, how stable is dummynet under heavy load, any experiences > there? > BTW, the machine is also doing port forwarding of HTTP connects to a proxy. > > TIA for any hints, > Ferdinand Goldmann Regards, Bosko Milekic bmilekic@technokratis.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0011271825480.57657-100000>