LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

noarp limit

To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: noarp limit
Cc: masar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Todd Lyons <tlyons@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 18:43:45 -0800
Hi guys (and masar), I am trying to use your noarp module, but am
hitting the limit of 16 entries.  I need it to work for (at the moment)
an additional 10 entries. I see in noarp.h:
#define NOARP_MAX_IP            (16)

Is it going to create problems to pick this number up to 32 or 64?  I
don't want to create any memory leaks or overruns.  Your code looks like
it allocates memory based on that NOARP_MAX_IP, but my c is not good
enough to know for sure if that will be a problem.  Here's what happens
on my system (RH 7.3 with 2.4.20-28.7smp kernel).  You can see that it's
failing on the 10 additional IP's after the initial 16.  Please let me
know if I can safely raise that number.

[root@rproxy1a init.d]# /etc/init.d/noarp start
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
/usr/local/sbin/noarpctl: ioctl error: No space left on device
[root@rproxy1a init.d]# /etc/init.d/noarp status
64.14.201.41 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.151 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.161 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.162 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.163 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.164 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.165 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.166 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.167 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.168 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.169 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.175 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.153 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.178 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.170 10.10.10.160 0 0 0
64.14.201.171 10.10.10.160 0 0 0

[root@rproxy1a network-scripts]# ls ifcfg-lo:*
ifcfg-lo:0   ifcfg-lo:13  ifcfg-lo:18  ifcfg-lo:22  ifcfg-lo:4 ifcfg-lo:9
ifcfg-lo:1   ifcfg-lo:14  ifcfg-lo:19  ifcfg-lo:23  ifcfg-lo:5
ifcfg-lo:10  ifcfg-lo:15  ifcfg-lo:2   ifcfg-lo:24  ifcfg-lo:6
ifcfg-lo:11  ifcfg-lo:16  ifcfg-lo:20  ifcfg-lo:25  ifcfg-lo:7
ifcfg-lo:12  ifcfg-lo:17  ifcfg-lo:21  ifcfg-lo:3   ifcfg-lo:8
-- 
Regards...              Todd
OS X: We've been fighting the "It's a mac" syndrome with upper management
for  years  now.  Lately  we've  taken  to  just  referring  to  new  mac 
installations  as  "Unix"  installations  when  presenting proposals  and 
updates.  For some reason, they have no problem with that.          -- /.
Linux kernel 2.6.8.1-12mdkenterprise   4 users,  load average: 0.02, 0.01, 0.00

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>