[Oisf-users] Help with 99% CPU usage

[Duarte Silva]

Hi Anoop,

Sorry for the late answer. In the last five days Suricata was running, it
had 0.28% of packet loss. So definitely, there was a huge improvement.

Now it's quite harder to create the back trace to confirm that the array
problem is still causing the drops but I would believe so.

Best regards,
Duarte Silva
On 12 Jun 2013 05:24, "Anoop Saldanha" <anoopsaldanha at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Duarte Silva
> <duarte.silva at serializing.me> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 June 2013 16:28:24 Anoop Saldanha wrote:
> >> Would it possible to run the current dev master and see how it
> >> performs?  While the list thing I specified in the previous mail is
> >> unchanged in the master, there are a couple of improvements on how we
> >> manage the items in the said list, which might make a difference in
> >> performance as specified here -
> >>
> http://www.poona.me/2013/05/suricata-transaction-engine-re-designed.html
> >
> > I have updated Suricatas to the current development master. We will most
> > likely have to wait until tomorrow morning to check if the optimizations
> > panned out (it looks promising by the way).
> >
>
> See anything with the current master?
>
> >> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Duarte Silva
> >>
> >> <duarte.silva at serializing.me> wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday 05 June 2013 16:04:02 Anoop Saldanha wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Duarte Silva
> >> >>
> >> >> <duarte.silva at serializing.me> wrote:
> >> >> > 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.
> >> >>
> >> >> @Duarte
> >> >>
> >> >> What version of suricata are you running?
> >> >
> >> > I have updated to the latest and greatest, 1.4.2
> >> >
> >> >> @Victor.
> >> >>
> >> >> From the last bt that Duarte sent, it looks like the list has grown
> in
> >> >> size.  The size is around 4k.  Probably that's the reason for the
> >> >> slowdown?  Every time we inspect state we will end up looping through
> >> >> the whole array.
>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------
> Anoop Saldanha
> http://www.poona.me
> -------------------------------
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/pipermail/oisf-users/attachments/20130612/ce07f7a3/attachment-0002.html>