Re: 3.9 freeze
Pedro Martelletto wrote: I cannot declare that the problem is solved... but I had no more freezes since I'm using a custom GENERIC kernel with doubled "NKMEMPAGES_MAX" and "maxusers", both with the i386 and the amd64 machines. But consider that this happened only 7 and 10 days ago... It has been approximately a month now. How have your boxes been doing? They both (i386 and amd64) had not a single freeze any more. Bye. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
> I cannot declare that the problem is solved... but I had no more freezes > since I'm using a custom GENERIC kernel with doubled "NKMEMPAGES_MAX" > and "maxusers", both with the i386 and the amd64 machines. > > But consider that this happened only 7 and 10 days ago... It has been approximately a month now. How have your boxes been doing? -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
2006/7/31, diego <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Pedro, since I set the "option NKMEMPAGES_MAX=65535" on kernel file, the server doesn't freeze UVM amap128305 10153K 50705K157284K4071891000 0 16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096,8192,16384,32768,65536 This server has an uptime 12 days, before the change only alive 3 or 4 days regards,. Doing that changes I can migrate 16GB of messages in mbox format to cyrus without limiting the number of lmtpd processes. I get some "uvm_mapent_alloc: out of static map entries" but the server doesn't freeze. Best regards,
Re: 3.9 freeze
Pedro, since I set the "option NKMEMPAGES_MAX=65535" on kernel file, the server doesn't freeze UVM amap128305 10153K 50705K157284K4071891000 0 16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096,8192,16384,32768,65536 This server has an uptime 12 days, before the change only alive 3 or 4 days regards,. - Original Message - From: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Federico Giannici" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: ; "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 2:00 PM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze Any news on this? -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
Federico Giannici wrote: Pedro Martelletto wrote: Any news on this? I cannot declare that the problem is solved... but I had no more freezes since I'm using a custom GENERIC kernel with doubled "NKMEMPAGES_MAX" and "maxusers", both with the i386 and the amd64 machines. But consider that this happened only 7 and 10 days ago... I have to add that both machines have a lot of memory (2GB) and often a lot of processes running. Bye. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
Pedro Martelletto wrote: Any news on this? I cannot declare that the problem is solved... but I had no more freezes since I'm using a custom GENERIC kernel with doubled "NKMEMPAGES_MAX" and "maxusers", both with the i386 and the amd64 machines. But consider that this happened only 7 and 10 days ago... Bye. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
Any news on this? -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 06:07:16PM +0200, Federico Giannici wrote: > It seems to me that under amd64 the "UVM Amap" usage is much higher then > under i386. So, even if by default the limit is the double of the i386, > it seems not enough. That's probably because the code allocates in multiples of sizeof(long), which is twice as bigger in 64-bit architectures than on 32-bit. I still have to do the math correctly, but the default limit may even not be enough for some i386 systems with gigantic amounts of memory. Ideally, the kernel should have a smarter way of setting the limit for malloc() in kmeminit(), perhaps based on physmem, or on the ability of growing its memory mapping dynamically, as needed. -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
Pedro Martelletto wrote: Federico, Your diagnosis is correct, that freeze can be the result of reaching the limit for UVM amap allocations. These get used by the kernel to describe anonymous memory mappings, and mmap malloc() puts the UVM subsystem under a higher load of those, eventually reaching the limit. Until an appropriate solution is found, you can try bumping the number of pages in the kernel's memory map (NKMEMPAGES). I have just installed a new 3.9-stable kernel with doubled NKMEMPAGES_MAX (and maxusers). I'll keep you informed if this solved the problem... Bye. P.S. It seems to me that under amd64 the "UVM Amap" usage is much higher then under i386. So, even if by default the limit is the double of the i386, it seems not enough. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
Federico, I put "option NKMEMPAGES_MAX=65535" on the kernel config. vmstat -m show that UVM amap 68283 2676K 2871K157284K 2166240 0 16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096,32768,65536 the limit now is 157284K, before was 39322K. regards,. - Original Message - From: "Federico Giannici" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: ; "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "mickey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 2:34 PM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze Pedro Martelletto wrote: Federico, Your diagnosis is correct, that freeze can be the result of reaching the limit for UVM amap allocations. These get used by the kernel to describe anonymous memory mappings, and mmap malloc() puts the UVM subsystem under a higher load of those, eventually reaching the limit. Until an appropriate solution is found, you can try bumping the number of pages in the kernel's memory map (NKMEMPAGES). I'm not sure of what variables to set and where. Is it correct to add the following line to the kernel configuration file? option NKMEMPAGES_MAX 65536 Thanks. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 07:34:00PM +0200, Federico Giannici wrote: > I'm not sure of what variables to set and where. options(4) should tell you that. -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
Pedro Martelletto wrote: Federico, Your diagnosis is correct, that freeze can be the result of reaching the limit for UVM amap allocations. These get used by the kernel to describe anonymous memory mappings, and mmap malloc() puts the UVM subsystem under a higher load of those, eventually reaching the limit. Until an appropriate solution is found, you can try bumping the number of pages in the kernel's memory map (NKMEMPAGES). I'm not sure of what variables to set and where. Is it correct to add the following line to the kernel configuration file? option NKMEMPAGES_MAX 65536 Thanks. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
Federico, Your diagnosis is correct, that freeze can be the result of reaching the limit for UVM amap allocations. These get used by the kernel to describe anonymous memory mappings, and mmap malloc() puts the UVM subsystem under a higher load of those, eventually reaching the limit. Until an appropriate solution is found, you can try bumping the number of pages in the kernel's memory map (NKMEMPAGES). -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 05:39:40PM +0200, Federico Giannici wrote: > I have noticed that the above "UVM amap" HighUse value is equal to the > Limit value. Indeed it looks suspicious. Not my area, though, so I'd have to look at the code to know the exact consequences. But yes, it's a possibility. Perhaps Mickey or Ted can enlighten us? -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
diego wrote: UVM amap201783 39322K 39322K 39322K12379757100 0 16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048,4096,8192,16384,32768,65536 I have noticed that the above "UVM amap" HighUse value is equal to the Limit value. As I have already said, the PC of mine that occasional freezes has high values of "VM amap" too. So I'm asking again: what happens when the Limit value is reached? Can it make the pc to freeze? What can we do to avoid this? Thanks. -- ___ __ |- [EMAIL PROTECTED] |ederico Giannici http://www.neomedia.it ___
Re: 3.9 freeze
The next time it freezes, break into ddb and get the output of 'show uvmexp'. -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
1520 0 8 0 scxspl 128 110083960 11008396 4 4 0 4 0 8 0 namei 1024 198672932 0 1986729326 6 0 6 0 8 0 vnodes 156 262100 101 0 101 101 0 8 0 nchpl 72 13100024 02424 0 8 0 ffsino 168 104415410 0 104412794 109 0 109 109 0 8 0 dino1pl 128 104415410 0 104412794 85 08585 0 8 0 pagedeppl 68 1393010 139293 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 inodedeppl84 7282820 728270 609 608 1 222 0 8 0 newblkpl 32 63302310 6330231 1 1 0 1 0 8 0 bmsafemappl 32 1258270 125821 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 allocdirectpl 68 11135130 11134475654 213 0 8 0 indirdeppl2827999027996 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 allocindirpl 52 52167180 5216717 32798 32797 1 136 0 8 0 freefragpl32 2967820 296750 2 1 1 2 0 8 0 freeblkspl 108 5145070 514505 606 605 1 196 0 8 0 freefilepl28 3085630 3085639595 051 0 8 0 diraddpl 32 4861810 4861741110 110 0 8 0 mkdirpl 2822530022530 1 1 0 1 0 8 0 dirrempl 32 5048240 504820 121 120 178 0 8 0 newdirblkpl 16 1720 172 1 1 0 1 0 8 0 dirhash 1024 5135990 512906 21372 21198 174 485 0 128 0 semapl68300 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 semupl 100 1554990 155498 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 pfrulepl 628 910 1216 21416 0 8 0 pfstatepl284 9291980 921933 61192 519 519 0 715 0 pfosfpen 108 7640 38214 31111 0 8 0 pfosfp28 4160 208 2 0 2 2 0 8 0 rtentpl 108 65950 6554 3 1 2 3 0 8 0 rttmrpl 32 94720 9472 1 1 0 1 0 8 0 tcpcbpl 400 3104210 309935 263 2144949 0 8 0 tcpqepl 16 2069030 206903 1 1 0 1 013 0 sackhlpl 20 2166630 216663 1 1 0 1 0 163 0 synpl184 2447290 2447297877 1 4 0 8 1 plimitpl 15210502010480 2 1 1 2 0 8 0 inpcbpl 216 10490980 104860289612828 0 8 0 In use 14564K, total allocated 32736K; utilization 44.5% thanks... diego,. - Original Message - From: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "mickey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 12:19 PM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze > ok, I have the server on datacenter, when freeze I will try it. > > - Original Message - > From: "mickey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:52 AM > Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze > > >> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 09:45:22AM -0300, diego wrote: >>> no, I can only ping the server or change tty (ctrl alt fn), but I can't >>> type anything. >> >> you should sysctl ddb.console=1 for that to work... >> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:34 AM >>> Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze >>> >>> >>> >Can you break into ddb? >>> > >>> >-p. >>> >> >> -- >>paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has >> remained) [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream which had a name of vmstat.bsd.0.core] [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream which had a name of dmesg.bsd.0.core] [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/octet-stream which had a name of ps.bsd.0.core]
Re: 3.9 freeze
ok, I have the server on datacenter, when freeze I will try it. - Original Message - From: "mickey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:52 AM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 09:45:22AM -0300, diego wrote: no, I can only ping the server or change tty (ctrl alt fn), but I can't type anything. you should sysctl ddb.console=1 for that to work... - Original Message - From: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:34 AM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze >Can you break into ddb? > >-p. -- paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)
Re: 3.9 freeze
no... - Original Message - From: "vladas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 10:00 AM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze On 03/07/06, diego <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: no, I can only ping the server or change tty (ctrl alt fn), but I can't type anything. how about by ssh? - Original Message - From: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:34 AM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze > Can you break into ddb? > > -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 09:45:22AM -0300, diego wrote: > no, I can only ping the server or change tty (ctrl alt fn), but I can't > type anything. you should sysctl ddb.console=1 for that to work... > - Original Message - > From: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:34 AM > Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze > > > >Can you break into ddb? > > > >-p. > -- paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)
Re: 3.9 freeze
no, I can only ping the server or change tty (ctrl alt fn), but I can't type anything. - Original Message - From: "Pedro Martelletto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "diego" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Monday, July 03, 2006 9:34 AM Subject: Re: 3.9 freeze Can you break into ddb? -p.
Re: 3.9 freeze
Can you break into ddb? -p.
3.9 freeze
Hi all, I have problems with 3.9, sometimes I recived "/bsd:
uvm_mapent_alloc: out of static map entries" without panics, but the last
time after 4 thar message the server freeze.
Yesterday server freeze again without any message, I can't connect to the
server, but ping respond.
It's run apache, qmail, mysql, djbdns, vpopmail, courier-imap, clamav,
spamassassin, pure-ftpd.
When server freeze I running a "systat vmstat", maybe it's help.
thanks in advance.
OpenBSD 3.9-stable (GENERIC) #0: Thu May 18 07:50:56 ART 2006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC
cpu0: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz ("GenuineIntel" 686-class) 2.80 GHz
cpu0:
FPU,V86,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CFLUSH,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,SBF,SSE3,MWAIT,CNXT-ID
real mem = 2146140160 (2095840K)
avail mem = 1952202752 (1906448K)
using 4278 buffers containing 107409408 bytes (104892K) of memory
mainbus0 (root)
bios0 at mainbus0: AT/286+(00) BIOS, date 11/05/04, BIOS32 rev. 0 @ 0xf0010
apm0 at bios0: Power Management spec V1.2
apm0: AC on, battery charge unknown
apm0: flags 30102 dobusy 0 doidle 1
pcibios0 at bios0: rev 2.1 @ 0xf/0x1
pcibios0: PCI IRQ Routing Table rev 1.0 @ 0xf3d40/224 (12 entries)
pcibios0: PCI Interrupt Router at 000:31:0 ("Intel 82801EB/ER LPC" rev 0x00)
pcibios0: PCI bus #3 is the last bus
bios0: ROM list: 0xc/0x8000 0xc8000/0x2200
cpu0 at mainbus0
pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 (no bios)
pchb0 at pci0 dev 0 function 0 "Intel 82875P Host" rev 0x02
ppb0 at pci0 dev 1 function 0 "Intel 82875P AGP" rev 0x02
pci1 at ppb0 bus 1
ppb1 at pci0 dev 3 function 0 "Intel 82875P PCI-CSA" rev 0x02
pci2 at ppb1 bus 2
em0 at pci2 dev 1 function 0 "Intel PRO/1000CT (82547EI)" rev 0x00: irq 10,
address 00:11:11:c1:1c:bf
uhci0 at pci0 dev 29 function 0 "Intel 82801EB/ER USB" rev 0x02: irq 5
usb0 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0
uhub0 at usb0
uhub0: Intel UHCI root hub, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1
uhub0: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered
uhci1 at pci0 dev 29 function 1 "Intel 82801EB/ER USB" rev 0x02: irq 9
usb1 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0
uhub1 at usb1
uhub1: Intel UHCI root hub, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1
uhub1: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered
uhci2 at pci0 dev 29 function 2 "Intel 82801EB/ER USB" rev 0x02: irq 10
usb2 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0
uhub2 at usb2
uhub2: Intel UHCI root hub, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1
uhub2: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered
uhci3 at pci0 dev 29 function 3 "Intel 82801EB/ER USB" rev 0x02: irq 5
usb3 at uhci3: USB revision 1.0
uhub3 at usb3
uhub3: Intel UHCI root hub, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1
uhub3: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered
ehci0 at pci0 dev 29 function 7 "Intel 82801EB/ER USB2" rev 0x02: irq 9
usb4 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0
uhub4 at usb4
uhub4: Intel EHCI root hub, rev 2.00/1.00, addr 1
uhub4: 8 ports with 8 removable, self powered
ppb2 at pci0 dev 30 function 0 "Intel 82801BA AGP" rev 0xc2
pci3 at ppb2 bus 3
ami0 at pci3 dev 0 function 0 "Symbios Logic MegaRAID" rev 0x01: irq 10 LSI
523 64b/lhc
ami0: FW 713N, BIOS vG119, 64MB RAM
ami0: 1 channels, 0 FC loops, 1 logical drives
scsibus0 at ami0: 40 targets
sd0 at scsibus0 targ 0 lun 0: SCSI2 0/direct fixed
sd0: 572331MB, 572331 cyl, 64 head, 32 sec, 512 bytes/sec, 1172133888 sec
total
scsibus1 at ami0: 16 targets
vga1 at pci3 dev 6 function 0 "ATI Rage XL" rev 0x27
wsdisplay0 at vga1 mux 1: console (80x25, vt100 emulation)
wsdisplay0: screen 1-5 added (80x25, vt100 emulation)
pciide0 at pci3 dev 7 function 0 "Promise PDC20319" rev 0x02: DMA
pciide0: using irq 11 for native-PCI interrupt
fxp0 at pci3 dev 8 function 0 "Intel PRO/100 VE" rev 0x01, i82562: irq 11,
address 00:11:11:c1:1c:c2
inphy0 at fxp0 phy 1: i82562ET 10/100 PHY, rev. 0
ichpcib0 at pci0 dev 31 function 0 "Intel 82801EB/ER LPC" rev 0x02
pciide1 at pci0 dev 31 function 1 "Intel 82801EB/ER IDE" rev 0x02: DMA,
channel 0 configured to compatibility, channel 1 configured to compatibility
pciide1: channel 0 disabled (no drives)
pciide1: channel 1 disabled (no drives)
pciide2 at pci0 dev 31 function 2 "Intel 82801EB SATA" rev 0x02: DMA,
channel 0 configured to native-PCI, channel 1 configured to native-PCI
pciide2: using irq 10 for native-PCI interrupt
ichiic0 at pci0 dev 31 function 3 "Intel 82801EB/ER SMBus" rev 0x02: irq 11
iic0 at ichiic0
adt0 at iic0 addr 0x2e: lm85 (ADT7460) rev 62
isa0 at ichpcib0
isadma0 at isa0
pckbc0 at isa0 port 0x60/5
pckbd0 at pckbc0 (kbd slot)
pckbc0: using irq 1 for kbd slot
wskbd0 at pckbd0: console keyboard, using wsdisplay0
pms0 at pckbc0 (aux slot)
pckbc0: using irq 12 for aux slot
wsmouse0 at pms0 mux 0
pcppi0 at isa0 port 0x61
midi0 at pcppi0:
spkr0 at pcppi0
lpt0 at isa0 port 0x378/4 irq 7
npx0 at isa0 port 0xf0/16: using exception 16
pccom0 at isa0 port 0x3f8/8 irq 4: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
pccom1 at isa0 port 0x2f8/8 irq 3: ns16550a, 16 byte fifo
fdc0 at isa0 port 0x3f0/6 irq 6 drq 2
biomask ef65 netmask ef65 ttymask ffe7
pctr: user-level cycle count
