Re: [Cerowrt-devel] 3.3.6-2

[Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>]

Hi Robert,

since I see the same log file on my router as Jim, I just want to report my observations below.

On May 24, 2012, at 11:58 AM, Robert Bradley wrote:

> On 24/05/12 19:15, Jim Gettys wrote:
>> On 05/24/2012 02:12 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>>> Hi Jim,
>>> 
>>> good point, I will go and see whether that is the cause for my crashes… Will return to this post if/when I have new data in either direction…
>> If you do, see if you can grab the babeld.conf file and add it to:
>> https://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/392
>> 
> 
> I don't know if it helps at all, but it looks like Babel's failing to obtain channel information for the guest interfaces (gw00 and gw10).  

	True, in my case I had set the 2.4GHz radio to auto channel select, which does not seem to work well with either babeld or its specific configuration.

> Are these disabled on your routers at the moment?  I suppose in the worst case you could try setting an explicit channel for both of the non-mesh guest interfaces and see if the logs clear up (or somehow pass "-L /dev/null" to babeld).

	After setting the 2.4GHz channel to 1 instead of auto /tmp/babeld.log still grows with the same entries. And on a WNDR3700v2 there are 30840 KB of tmpfs on /tmp so the babeld.log size of 256KB should not by itself cause the router to crash. That said, while testing this hypothesis by filling most of /tmp (dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/delete_me bs=1024 count=30000, so that around 340KB stayed free) the router reliably went first into OOM and the rebooted itself. Might it be that the size of the /tmp filesystem is too large if actually used? If I naively add the VSZs of most processes I end up at around 90% of available memory, so worst case there actually only seems to be room for a much smaller /tmp than 30MB. . Maybe restricting /tmp to 6000 KB might make this problem go away (or hooking up a swap device). Does this reasoning sound sane? Once I figure out how to reduce the size of /tmp I will test this.


> 
> I'm assuming the ad-hoc mesh links are working fine, since gw01/gw11 aren't present in the log fragment.

	In my case I do not know as I never tried to test with a mesh client.

best
	Sebastian

> -- 
> Robert Bradley
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel