| To: | Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: dst cache overflow 2.2.x; x>=16 |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 15 Apr 2002 21:53:15 +0200 |
| Cc: | "Milam, Chad" <Chad_Milam@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, "Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>" <IMCEANOTES-Julian+20Anastasov+20+3Cja+40ssi+2Ebg+3E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204152232230.1201-100000@u.domain.uli> |
| References: | <D4CA6B275AA33241AC771F0C0B43A921011BE86A@nyc285ex01.nyc.corp.yr.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204152232230.1201-100000@u.domain.uli> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.22.1i |
> I mean when you see the dst cache overflow message can the > command help? But ... may be are running a kernel patched with your > changes. I'm asking this because I know cases where wrong changes > can make problems with dst cache. But the plain kernel should be > fine. One question more: can you say that this box is used only as > router or what kind of TCP or UDP connections you have (to/from the > box)? There can be some corner cases in the dst cache usage from > connected sockets. I would suspect CheckPoint (I think it has kernel modules, hasn't it) We had a similar report of such a thing a few months ago and they were using CheckPoint too. -Andi |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: dst cache overflow 2.2.x; x>=16, Julian Anastasov |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: dst cache overflow 2.2.x; x>=16, Milam, Chad |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: dst cache overflow 2.2.x; x>=16, Julian Anastasov |
| Next by Thread: | RE: dst cache overflow 2.2.x; x>=16, Milam, Chad |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |