e of the mbuf zone
> is determined at boot time. Perhaps Bosko (who wrote both mballoc and
> mbuma, IIRC) knows.
>
> DES
> --
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Bosko Milekic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To see all the content I generate on the web, check out my P
m ?
>
> *puzzled*
>
> -pcf.
> _______
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
--
Bosko Milekic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
t on auto or set to a value. Let me know if there is
> any specific types of tests you want doing.
>
> Chris
I'm not sure I understand. Setting it to zero _means_ "auto."
I'll likely commit the patch. Thanks.
--
Bosko M
Can you please give an update?
-Bosko
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 08:43:10PM +, Chris wrote:
> I apologise I have yet to test the patch, but will try and do so as
> soon as possible by the end of the weekend.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:52:19 -0500, Bo
Can you please give an update?
-Bosko
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 08:43:53PM +, Chris wrote:
> thanks I will try this out as soon as possible and report back.
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 17:38:54 -0500, Bosko Milekic
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Please
list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
--
Bosko Milekic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: src/sys/kern/kern_mbuf.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncv
me to mind was something
with PAE and how it affects PDE modifications.
On i386, it might be worth trying these combinations:
1. SMP, NO PAE.
2. UP, PAE.
3. UP, NO PAE.
As we already know that "SMP, PAE" for you has problems.
--
Bosko Milekic
[EMAIL PROTECTE
es this do?
> Bye,
>
> Mipam.
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
--
Bosko Milekic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTE
some point.
Also, obviously, make sure that you're not getting any power surges or
anything of the sort; basically anything hardware-related that could
possibly cause a reboot. If you're plugged into a series-connected
outlet, I would advise to try a different outlet. If you
stable and occasionally apply your
security patches to that one machine which would again export the
sources via NFS. You could then build using the NFS mounted sources
with a local object target on each server, as needed. This is how I
do it here and it works pretty well.
--
Bosko Mi
snd = {sb_cc = 0,
> sb_hiwat = 33304, sb_mbcnt = 0, sb_mbmax = 262144, sb_lowat = 2048,
> sb_mb = 0x0, sb_sel = {si_pid = 0, si_note = {slh_first = 0x0},
> si_flags = 0}, sb_flags = 0, sb_timeo = 0}, so_upcall = 0,
> so_upcallarg = 0x0, so_cred = 0xc1a0a900, so_gencnt = 72140,
> so_emuldata = 0x0, so_accf = 0x0}
> (kgdb)
>
> SO it looks like somewhere there is also a use-mbuf-alloc-without-checking
> bug somewhere.
>
> Gavin
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
>
--
Bosko Milekic * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
ess local patch I
> have to worry about applying...
Done. Thank you.
> Fred
>
> --
> Fred Clift - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Remember: If brute
> force doesn't work, you're just not using enough.
--
Bosko Milekic * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubs
dware
> support is simply not impressive! I'm not about to go back to wheel based mouse
> (got tired of cleaning wheels).
>
> I hope this doesn't offend anyone. (Just got tired of listening to crap!)
Go away.
> Sung N. Cho
Go away,
--
Bosko Milekic
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Eurgh.
Not the first time I see this, and not from one source. Recent
complaints have come in about the exact same problem only for
RELENG_4.
Please try: http://people.freebsd.org/~bmilekic/code/bogus_mb.diff
And try your best to reproduce.
Regards,
Bosko.
Mike Tancsa wrote:
>
> Not sure if
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As we are facing a heavy fragments attack (40-60byte packets in a
> ~ 1000 pkts/sec flow) I see some sporadic panics. Kernel/world is
> 4.2-STABLE as of 18 Jan 2001 -- it's a production machine and I
hadn't yet
> the chance for another update; if it's been fix
ed to X, so fix
it" just doesn't cut it, if you're expecting people to prioritize it.
Furthermore, I've noticed that Marko's report doesn't include the
debugging information which I feel I made very clear is required to even
glance at the problem.
contributes to the mb_map size. I see
your point, though, in the sense that by setting up NMBCLUSTERS, the
overall size of mb_map will be affected by that setting, and not
MAXUSERS, in general.
So here's the question: Why not remove MAXUSERS' influence over the
size of
nable amounts
will, in fact, contribute to a larger mb_map.
--
Bosko Milekic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://pages.infinit.net/bmilekic/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
18 matches
Mail list logo
