Hi, please retest with latest CVS HEAD. Bug should fixed now.
Thanks, Alex Stephane Rosa schrieb:
Opened bug 0000230 about "bearerbox causes 99% cpu load" (for the records in this users mailing list) Stephane -- Stephane Rosa IT Security & Network Specialist, EMEA Tel: +41 21 966-1238 Cell: +41 79 616-0828 Stryker EMEA Grand Rue 92 CH-1820 Montreux http://www.europe.stryker.com *Stephane Rosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 25-05-05 12:39 To Julien Buratto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc [email protected] Subject Re: cpu load 99% by bearerbox I just compiled the same sources on a dual-cpu Sun server and the behavior is exactly the same as on RedHat 9 (SE). How come is this happening ? Are we the only one experiencing this ?? Stephane -- Stephane Rosa IT Security & Network Specialist, EMEA Tel: +41 21 966-1238 Cell: +41 79 616-0828 Stryker EMEA Grand Rue 92 CH-1820 Montreux http://www.europe.stryker.com *Stephane Rosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 25-05-05 11:34 To Julien Buratto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc [email protected] Subject Re: cpu load 99% by bearerbox Fiddling with gdb, I found out that the high cpu load is caused by the call to gwthread_sleep(10.0); at line 605 of bearerbox.c. Tracing further, gwthread_sleep calls poll(), with a timeout of 10 seconds. When I step that line, gdb hangs for the entire 10 seconds and the cpu raises straight to 99%. poll() is supposed to sleep until something happend on an fd, I have no idea why this happens. Those two pieces of code seem not to have changed since 2003, so I'm surprised we are not all of us seeing the same issue. I will compile and run it on Solaris to see if it makes any difference. Maybe poll() behaves differently on RedHat SE. Cheers Stephane -- Stephane Rosa IT Security & Network Specialist, EMEA Tel: +41 21 966-1238 Cell: +41 79 616-0828 Stryker EMEA Grand Rue 92 CH-1820 Montreux http://www.europe.stryker.com *Julien Buratto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24-05-05 17:49 To Stephane Rosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc [email protected] Subject Re: cpu load 99% by bearerbox Stephane Rosa wrote: > > Thanks Julien, I did that already and the gdb thing > reveals a backtrace on gwthread_sleep like you were > experiencing I guess. > > May I ask how you solved your problem ? > > Thanks > Make this laught: I havent' :) I'm still using 1.4.0 because CVS goes into cpu overload so I've decided to manually patch the 1.4.0 and apply there my own code. J
