The updated patch is available in both locations that you have mentioned. CVS does get updated quicker than the web site (the web site sync's with CVS periodically). Steven > -----Original Message----- > From: Sally Huang [mailto:sallyhsl@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 12:03 PM > > Thanks a lot. I send to a wrong email address last time. > > Where is the lastest epoll patch that solved the > "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on fd=197" problem? > Is it in squid src tagged with epoll-2.5 in squid CVS? Or, is it in > the patch from > http://devel.squid-cache.org/cgi-bin/diff2/epoll-2_5.patch?s2_5? > > sally > > On 5/11/05, Steven Wilton <swilton@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I did manage to trace the cause of the > "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on > > fd=197" messages. The latest epoll patch fixes this problem. > > > > There are 2 messages that the new patch will cause to > appear with the > > default debug options (ALL,1): > > > > storeClientCopy3: <url> - clearing ENTRY_DEFER_READ > > > > This is caused when an object has been deferred, and for > some reason the > > memory has not been freed, even though all clients have > seen all in-memory > > parts of the url. I can't see why this would be the case, > and I'm sure it's > > not caused by the epoll code, but the epoll code needs to catch this > > condition. > > > > WARNING defer handler for fd=<fd>(<url>) does not call > commDeferFD() - > > backing off manually. > > > > This is caused when an object has data ready to be read, > and the defer > > handler reports that the read should be deferred, but does > not tell the > > epoll code to back off. This debug would probably be very > noisy if used > > with delay pools, but other than that it indicates a > non-optimised defer > > handler. > > > > These two debug statements do not produce a large number of > entries in the > > debug logs (181 and 52 messages respectively out of 3204 > messages total in > > one of our proxy server's cache.log out of a total of ~4.2 million > > requests). The proxy server does handle these cases > appropriately, but they > > indicate sub-optimal performance. As they represent a tiny > fraction of the > > total number of requests, I have not spent any time working > out the exact > > cause of these problems. > > > > Regards > > Steven > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Sally Huang [mailto:sallyhsl@xxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 9:34 AM > > > To: Henrik Nordstrom > > > Cc: squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: Odp: Re: [squid-users] how to apply epoll-2_5 > > > patch to squid2.5-stable9 > > > > > > Thanks for your clarify. > > > > > > The author doesn't reply me. Could you pls do me a favor and check > > > with the author whether he has updated the latest epoll > patch so that > > > everyone won't face this "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): > failed on fd=197" > > > problem? > > > > > > Regards, > > > sally > > > > > > > > > On 5/10/05, Henrik Nordstrom <hno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 10 May 2005, Sally Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > Do you mean the " epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on > fd=197" bug > > > > > isalready fixed on both epoll-2_5 patch and epoll-2.5 > branch in > > > > > squidCVS? > > > > > > > > I am the wrong person to answer that question, but as you I > > > remember the > > > > branch author mentioning that there has been fixes in that area. > > > > > > > > I answerd to the question how you could get the latest > > > version of the > > > > epoll branch. > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Henrik > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release > Date: 5/10/2005 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: > 5/10/2005 > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005 > > -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005
