| To: | Sridhar Samudrala <sri@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [DEBUG]: sk_forward_alloc assertion failures |
| From: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 14 Jan 2005 13:10:05 +1100 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, anton@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501131741430.25252@w-sridhar.beaverton.ibm.com> |
| References: | <20050113171234.3fde0925.davem@davemloft.net> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501131741430.25252@w-sridhar.beaverton.ibm.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i |
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 05:50:17PM -0800, Sridhar Samudrala wrote: > > I think with this patch we will start seeing > sk_wmem_queued assertions. Not necessarily. What's probably happening currently is that sk_forward_alloc is temporarily raised above the value it should have. It then gets cut down by the reclaim function and subsequently goes negative. Since there is no reclaim for sk_wmem_queued it doesn't happen there. So taking out the adjustments should not cause any problems of sk_wmem_queued, theoretically :) -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [DEBUG]: sk_forward_alloc assertion failures, Sridhar Samudrala |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | b44: timeout on initialization, Stephen Hemminger |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [DEBUG]: sk_forward_alloc assertion failures, Sridhar Samudrala |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [DEBUG]: sk_forward_alloc assertion failures, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |