On Feb 6, 2008 5:38 PM, Tracy, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I checked /var/adm/messages and /var/log/syslog, and didn't see anything 
> related to
> iSCSI in any of those locations. Is there anywhere else I should look for 
> iscsitgtd logs?

Judging by the code, iscsitgtd logs to /tmp/target_log.

-- 
Regards,
Andrey

>
> Cheers-
> John
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrey Kuzmin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 9:24 AM
> To: Tracy, John
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: iscsitgt becoming very slow after two weeks uptime
>
> > Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:34:07 PST
> > From: John Tracy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: [storage-discuss] iscsitgt becoming very slow after two
> >         weeks   uptime
> > To: [email protected]
> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > The problem happened again (as expected). I did apply an IDR patch as 
> > recommended by Sun,
> > patch IDR137189-02 for those who may be interested. After issuing a reboot, 
> > I then started
> > hammering away at the iSCSI targets on this box again. These patches seem 
> > to primarily have
> > to do with ZFS items. I'm thinking that this may be off the mark, as even 
> > while the performance
> > is terrible with iSCSI mounted volumes, local IO operations on the box 
> > utilizing the same ZFS
> > pool are as quick as should be expected.
> >
> > Just out of curiosity, I generated a core of the iscsitgtd and then ran mdk 
> > against it. This is the result. I'm not sure where to go from here:
> >
> > gcore 12529
> > gcore: core.12529 dumped
> > bash-3.00# mdb core.12529
> > Loading modules: [ ld.so.1 libumem.so.1 libavl.so.1 libc.so.1 
> > libnvpair.so.1 libuutil.so.1 ]
> <snip>
> > > ::findleaks
> > CACHE             LEAKED           BUFCTL CALLER
> > 0000000000484028     239 00000000004ab620 iscsi_full_feature+0x365
>
> iscsi_full_feature allocates memory for iSCSI Additional Header
> Segment, and indeed does not free it up in some cases (see the patch
> below). Nonetheless, these leaks are on error handling path and should
> not show up during normal operations. Did you notice any iscsitgt
> error messages in the log?
>
>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >            Total     239 buffers, 15296 bytes
> >
> >
> > From what I read, this indicates the operations I'm performing are 
> > generating quite a few
> > memory leaks within the iscsitgtd process. Is my understanding correct?
> >
> > These statistics are gathered before the box exhibits the problem (within 
> > an hour of restarting
> > iscsitgt).
>
> --
> Regards,
> Andrey
> Index: iscsitgtd/iscsi_ffp.c
> ===================================================================
> --- iscsitgtd/iscsi_ffp.c       (revision 945)
> +++ iscsitgtd/iscsi_ffp.c       (working copy)
> @@ -98,6 +98,7 @@
>                         (void) snprintf(debug, sizeof (debug),
>                             "CON%x  Failed to read in AHS", c->c_num);
>                         queue_str(c->c_mgmtq, Q_CONN_ERRS, msg_log, debug);
> +                       free(ahs);
>                         return (False);
>                 }
>         }
> @@ -117,6 +118,8 @@
>                             "CON%x  CRC error: actual 0x%x v. calc 0x%x",
>                             c->c_num, crc_actual, crc_calculated);
>                         queue_str(c->c_mgmtq, Q_CONN_ERRS, msg_log, debug);
> +                       if (ahs != NULL)
> +                               free(ahs);
>                         return (False);
>                 }
>         }
>
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to