100% cpu utilization

[Tristan Ball]

Can I recommend you try compiling samba with the --with-spinlocks arguement 
to configure?

We've had very similar problems here, and while using spinlocks (internal 
to samba) rather than fcntl locks (which requires, sooner or latter, a drop 
into the kernel, and access what appears to be a single mutex), seems to 
help considerably.

Cheers,
         T.

At 08:57 AM 11/1/2001, you wrote:
>We continue to experience problems with the latest Samba CVS on Solaris 8
>consuming 100% of cpu utilization.  The problem seems to occur when the
>system is experiencing heavy load.
>
>Here's what we see of the problem.
>
>Using top, we note 100% CPU utilization.  There are approx 200 smb
>processes with a handful of the processes in a runable state using up to
>2% of CPU each.  It's hard to get details on one of the problematic
>processes because as quickly as we can identify them, they disappear.
>Using truss, I find most processes in an expected poll state, but when I
>can catch one of the problem processes I see bunches of fcntl with calls
>like kill(20759, SIG#0) interspersed.  I did manage to grab a core of one
>of these processes and have included a stack backtrace below.
>
>__fcntl(0xd,0x23,0x80474c4) + c
>fcntl(0xd,0x23,0x80474c4,0x2c13c) + 1f
>tdb_brlock(0x81ec8f8,0xa8,0x2,0x23,0x0,0xdfa65b2b,0xd,0x23) + 68
>tdb_lock(0x81ec8f8,0x0,0x2,0x16,0x1,0x81e9088) + a2
>tdb_chainlock(0x81ec8f8,0x81e8f70,0xc,0x810d0e8,0x81e8f70,0xc) + 2a
>delete_fn(0x81ec8f8,0x81e8f70,0xc,0x81e8f7c,0x8a,0x804764c,0x2,0x83) + 3d
>tdb_traverse(0x81ec8f8,0x810d0d0,0x804764c,0x806e467) + 9b
>locking_end(0xdfa83000,0x80476c0,0x0,0x0,0x0,0x804768c,0x8047690,0x806da8b)
>+ 47
>exit_server(0x8144c80,0x0,0x0,0x0,0x0,0x8047abc) + 160
>dflt_sig(0xf,0x0,0x80476c0) + 13
>sigacthandler() + 25
>dbg_mask(0x15,0x8047a3c,0x0,0x0,0x8047a34,0x5) + 2044f887
>sys_select(0xd,0x8047a3c,0x8047a34,0x80a12f9) + c7
>receive_message_or_smb(0x8210991,0x10040,0xea60,0x80a25e0) + 169
>smbd_process(0xdfbed1e8,0x8047b10,0x8047bf8,0x210,0xdfa0d67f,0xdfa0d6a3,0xdfbe13
>7f,0x8047b10,0x8b,0x1,0x8047b48,0x806d94f,0x2,0x8047b54,0x8047b60,0x8144c30)
>+ 11e
>main(0x2,0x8047b54,0x8047b60) + 6d9
>
>Here's a snippet from log.smbd in the time period leading up to the
>problem in case it is useful
>
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:get_socket_addr(1038)
>   getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:get_socket_addr(1038)
>   getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/access.c:check_access(322)
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:get_socket_addr(1038)
>   getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
>   Denied connection from  (0.0.0.0)
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 1, pid=414] smbd/process.c:process_smb(850)
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:get_socket_addr(1038)
>   getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
>   Connection denied from 0.0.0.0
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(542)
>   write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Broken pipe
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket(566)
>   write_socket: Error writing 5 bytes to socket 5: ERRNO = Broken pipe
>[2001/10/31 11:49:20, 0, pid=414] lib/util_sock.c:send_smb(730)
>   Error writing 5 bytes to client. -1. (Broken pipe)
>[2001/10/31 11:49:29, 0, pid=423] lib/util_sock.c:get_socket_addr(1038)
>   getpeername failed. Error was Transport endpoint is not connected
>
>Any insight as to this problem?
>
>Scott
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Scott Moomaw, Network Administrator              Scott at Bridgewater.edu
>  Bridgewater College, IT Center
>  Bridgewater, VA  22812
>  Phone (540) 828 - 8000  x5437              FAX:  (540) 828 - 5493