From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 26 21:07:18 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BFA1065670 for ; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 21:07:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kerbzo@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74DC58FC15 for ; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 21:07:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iakl21 with SMTP id l21so9830869iak.13 for ; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 13:07:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=vpb0fRtD+/1Gj0DrfQyvea9gaje3kbjwYk9DYuzPAAs=; b=DGZ9gaO+eAdYZG0A1Z/RNC9efCSCPm4OFcrvXEvqdg0ln5ueNh3DEf4X3og/fL1Fmw aEGJm+bl0oltSLCGtnyyjkEAYNPzzhwcWUvERJxxjWxInMQR9WprASlS+Ma3MCcyzE2o bT4W2ICqM81Kg6qgFwToSv25YGBSDzzMly7Xo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.10.163 with SMTP id j3mr36499510igb.15.1322341637986; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 13:07:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.34.68 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Nov 2011 13:07:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4ED077BF.10205@freebsd.org> References: <4ECEF6FD.5050006@freebsd.org> <4ED077BF.10205@freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 22:07:17 +0100 Message-ID: From: kerbzo To: Lawrence Stewart Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, stb@lassitu.de, raul@turing.b2n.org, Kris Bauer , george+freebsd@m5p.com, FreeBSD Release Engineering Team , freebsd@jdc.parodius.com Subject: Re: TCP Reassembly Issues X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 21:07:18 -0000 Hi, this patch works for me, also. Reass counter now does not increase ( tcpreass: 40, 1680, 21, 399, 572562, 0, 0 ) and a severe network performance issue of netatalk and afpd, used as a "Time Capsule" server for mac os x, seems now disappeared. Really thank you, best regards, On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Lawrence Stewart wrote: > On 11/25/11 13:01, Lawrence Stewart wrote: >> >> On 11/24/11 18:02, Kris Bauer wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am currently experiencing an issue with FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 r227852 >>> where the >>> net.inet.tcp.reass.curesegments value is constantly increasing (and not >>> descreasing when there is nominal traffic with the box). It is causing >>> tcp >>> slowdowns as described with kern/155407: >>> >>> Exhausted net.inet.tcp.reass.maxsegments block recovering tcp session >>> (for >>> this socket and any other socket waiting for retransmited packets). After >>> exhausted net.inet.tcp.reass.maxsegments allocation new entry in >>> tcp_reass >>> failed (for this socket and any other socket waiting for retransmited >>> packets). >>> >>> I have increased the reass.maxsegments value to 16384 to temporarily >>> avoid >>> the problem, but the cursegments number keeps rising and it seems it will >>> occur again. >>> >>> Is this an issue that anyone else has seen? I can provide more >>> information >>> if need be. >> >> Thanks Kris, Raul and Stefan for the reports, I'll look into this. > > I think I've got it - a stupid 1 line logic bug. My apologies for missing it > when I reviewed the patch which introduced the bug (patch was committed to > head as r226113, MFCed to stable/9 as r226228). > > Due to some miscommunication, the initial patch was committed to and MFCed > from head much later than it should have been in the 9.0 release cycle and > instead of being included in the BETAs, didn't make it in until 9.0-RC1 I > believe i.e. only RC1 and RC2 should be experiencing the issue. > > Could those who have reported the bug and are able to recompile their kernel > to test a patch please try the following and report back to the list: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~lstewart/patches/misctcp/tcp_reass_plugzoneleak_10.x.r227986.patch > > The patch is against head r227986 but will apply and work correctly for 9.0 > as well. > > Cheers, > Lawrence >