[Oisf-users] Help with 99% CPU usage
Duarte Silva
duarte.silva at serializing.me
Wed Jun 5 09:15:40 UTC 2013
On Thursday 16 May 2013 10:01:26 Duarte Silva wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 May 2013 19:54:21 Anoop Saldanha wrote:
> > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Duarte Silva
> >
> > <duarte.silva at serializing.me> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm currently facing a problem with Suricata. After running for a while,
> > > there is always an AF_PACKET thread (workers mode) that hogs the CPU to
> > > which it is bound to creating an awful amount of packet loss. I have
> > > discarded the>
> > >
> > > following factors:
> > > - Number of rules, it has also happened without rules;
> > > - Amount of network traffic, I have seen Suricata handle ~18 MBs (150
> > > MBps) of>
> > >
> > > traffic without problems with the current configuration and it as also
> > > happened with only ~2 MBs of traffic;
> > >
> > > - Memory, Suricata was only using ~500 MB of it when the CPU usage
> > > pegged
> > > to>
> > >
> > > 100%;
> > >
> > > This happens repeatedly and after it happens, Suricata takes a long time
> > > to
> > > stop. Could some tell me what I can do to debug this issue?
> > >
> > > Suricata is executed with the following command line:
> > >
> > > suricata -D -c /etc/suricata/suricata.yaml --pidfile
> > > /var/lock/subsys/suricata --af-packet=eth1 --user=suri --group=suri
> > >
> > > I have also attached any files that can help out in debugging.
> >
> > While this thread hogs the cpu, can you attach gdb to the suricata
> > process, and get a bt for the specified thread, and also all the
> > threads.
>
> Follows in the attachments the traces for the hogging thread (I had to wait
> almost height hours for it to happen). I have created three traces in
> different times while the AFPacketeth12 was hoging the CPU, all of them end
> up in the list_array_get in dslib.c.
>
> I will investigate what is happening by looking at the code, when it happens
> again I will also take traces for the other threads.
Hi,
I have taken two more traces when it happened again. Could you please give a
little help on this? I think it has something to do with HTTP processing.
Best regards,
Duarte Silva
More information about the Oisf-users
mailing list