From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Sep 23 01:27:59 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id BAA28596 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 23 Sep 1997 01:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from citadel.cdsec.com (citadel.cdsec.com [192.96.22.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA28590; Tue, 23 Sep 1997 01:27:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nobody@localhost) by citadel.cdsec.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id KAA22108; Tue, 23 Sep 1997 10:33:42 +0200 (SAT) Received: by citadel via recvmail id 22075; Tue Sep 23 10:33:02 1997 by gram.cdsec.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA11350; Tue, 23 Sep 1997 10:11:48 +0200 (SAT) From: Graham Wheeler Message-Id: <199709230811.KAA11350@cdsec.com> Subject: Re: Bug in malloc/free (was: Memory leak in getservbyXXX?) To: jmb@FreeBSD.ORG (Jonathan M. Bresler) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 10:11:47 +0200 (SAT) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199709221826.LAA06521@hub.freebsd.org> from "Jonathan M. Bresler" at Sep 22, 97 11:26:34 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25-h4.1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > Graham Wheeler wrote: > > > > Unfortunately not. At present most of our clients are still running the > > firewall software on FreeBSD 2.1.0, and have no problem (with at least > > one site of about 2000 users having run the gateway process for about > > four months without a restart or reboot). We recently upgraded a couple > > of sites to FreeBSD 2.2.2, mostly to allow Adaptec 2940 support. Of these > > good to hear that 2.1.0 is working well for you. ;) > what hardware are you using to support 2000 users? Pentium 166MHz, 64Mb RAM. Note that the users don't have accounts on the machine - the machine is just the firewall gateway for the users. > > Only one site has been affected by the bug, with the main distinguishing > > characteristic being a very heavy network load (there are approximately > > 5000 users behind this firewall, with quite heavy WWW browser useage taking > > place). > > does it crash them often, or only rarely...(rather inexact question) About every half hour. > > As the loop can occur anywhere where there is a call to malloc, directly > > or indirectly, we have not been able to isolate it at all. Most of the C++ > > classes that are used have their own test programs to test them in isolation, > did you replace new() in any of these classes? No. -- Dr Graham Wheeler E-mail: gram@cdsec.com Citadel Data Security Phone: +27(21)23-6065/6/7 Internet/Intranet Network Specialists Mobile: +27(83)-253-9864 Firewalls/Virtual Private Networks Fax: +27(21)24-3656 Data Security Products WWW: http://www.cdsec.com/