On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Cathey, Jim<[email protected]> wrote: >>Please try 1.15.0 > > After back-porting the changes to the 1.13.2 environment > so that it will compile, it still exhibits the slow leakage > of socket fd's. (The changes to 1.15.0 are mostly #definery > to compile, and putting back the non-parser_t version of the > config file logic. I don't think this is significant to the > problem at hand.) It's been running less than an hour, and > there are already six sockets open, up from one in the beginning. > > (Our target system is expected to run for years at a time with > no problems and no reboots, and it will soon be in a noticeable > part of the cell phone infrastructure of the USA, in thousands > of field sites that nobody wants to have to drive to to > power-cycle because they can't telnet in anymore! We're > motivated to fix this.) > > Stimulus behavior is a mix of the telnet firehose I gave, > along with disabling and enabling the telnet service a > few times via commenting in and out the (lone) service > line and HUPping inetd.
Let's try to simplify it. Try some (or all) of these: * Run inetd with the same config on your own x?86 desktop. Try to make it leak fds. Does it still happen? (iow: does architecture, CPU speed, or network latency matter?) * Does it happen if you start inetd, *don't* SIGHUP it, and repeatedly run ./bury against it? (is SIGHUPing a factor in reproducing it?) * Does it happen if you replace telnet stream tcp nowait.12 root /usr/sbin/telnetd telnetd -i with telnet stream tcp nowait.12 root /bin/true true (iow, if server prog just exits at once)? -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
