28 Dec
2018
28 Dec
'18
6:38 p.m.
Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2018, 16:21:59 CET schrieb Daniel-Constantin Mierla:
I noticed many commits replacing the log messages in
case of allocation
failure with some macros. That is good, bringing consistency, but I
think that we should offer couple of them. The current one is rather dry
(meaning that it offers very few context details), which matches most of
the existing log messages used in such cases.
Hi Daniel,
yes - I noticed that these error message were really inconsistent, sometimes
even hard to understand for normal users (like "running out of pkg").
This was my motivation to do the conversion. Additionally it is this way much
easier to analyze the log files for this particular errors.
But there are also other log messages for such cases
which give more
details, like for what the allocation fails, some also giving the
requested size of allocation.
In the core this was done inconsistently (like some error msg were more
detailed than others, sometimes in the same function). Sometimes the error
message was wrong because of some changes to the code. Therefore I removed it
in some cases.
For modules that allocate bigger memory blocks (htable, lcr etc..) I can see
why it make sense to output more information.
As the core is using really small memory blocks, I don't think information
about the size is really useful here. The usual response to this problem would
be to just increase the PKG memory pool.
The location were the allocation error happens can be usually also spot from
the logging message (the function name).
So besides the current two macros (one for shm and one
for pkg), we
should add few more. Like:
#define PKG_MEM_ERROR_MSG(m) LM_ERR("could not allocate private memory
from pkg pool - %s\n", m);
So one can do:
PKG_MEM_ERROR_MSG("needed for htable struct");
And one to include also the size:
#define PKG_MEM_ERROR_SZ(s, m) LM_ERR("could not allocate private memory
from pkg pool - size: %u - %s\n", (unsigned int)s, m);
I will add macros for this two additional cases, probably this evening.
No need to revert what was done, but I think for the
future we would
preserve better information for troubleshooting in some cases, instead
of replacing those messages that now have more details with the bare
error log message.
See my comment above, in which conditions do you think we should preserve the
size and additional error message during the conversation?
Best regards,
Henning
--
Henning Westerholt - https://skalatan.de/blog/
Kamailio services - https://skalatan.de/services
Kamailio security assessment - https://skalatan.de/de/assessment