Re: panic: kmem_map too small at heavy packet traffic

Cool, what's the PR number? It sounds like something is odd. Email -current with the PR details (number, how you reproduce it, etc) and let's see if we can get one of the VM/UMA gurus to look into it. Thanks, -adrian On 27 July 2013 00:26, Tugrul Erdogan wrote: > I have just pilled a PR. > >

Re: panic: kmem_map too small at heavy packet traffic

I have just pilled a PR. The negative written value is directly malloc's size parameter (in fact after some page size alignment enlargements operation). This parameter has been defined as "unsigned long" but printing with "%ld" as signed long. So if the size is very very big (more than 2^63 at amd

Re: panic: kmem_map too small at heavy packet traffic

Hi Have you filed a PR? This should get fixed. Also, being -ve is a problem. Is the value really negative? Is it wrapping badly? -adrian On 25 July 2013 07:57, Tugrul Erdogan wrote: > howdy all, > > At my work, I am using 10.0-CURRENT on Intel(R) Xeon(R) E5620 with 16GB > ram. I am taking >

Re: panic: kmem_map too small at heavy packet traffic

I've been under the impression that synproxy was broken for quite some time, but I know there has been a lot of work on pf in HEAD so I can't be sure where it might stand there. Can anyone confirm/deny this? And not to discourage you, but the pf documentation does say "Routine use of this option i

Re: panic: kmem_map too small at heavy packet traffic

Specifically, I am taking this panic when doing ip spoof attack while syn-proxy activated. The output of system arguments below: kern.malloc_count: 315 vm.md_malloc_wait: 0 vfs.bufmallocspace: 0 vfs.maxmallocbufspace: 86269952 vm.kmem_size: 16686845952 vm.kmem_size_min: 0 vm.kmem_size_max: 3298534