Henning,
No earlier errors, kamailio starts up like normal from a syslog point of
view, "RTP Enabled" followed by:
verbose 3
Jun 16 16:30:14 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6364]: CRITICAL:core:init_io_wait:
could not alloc epoll array
Jun 16 16:30:14 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6364]: CRITICAL:core:tcp_receive_loop:
exiting...
Jun 16 16:30:14 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6338]: INFO:core:handle_sigs: child
process 6364 exited normally, status=255
Jun 16 16:30:14 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6338]: INFO:core:handle_sigs:
terminating due to SIGCHLD
verbose 5: pretty much shows the same:
Jun 16 16:33:57 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6537]: CRITICAL:core:init_io_wait:
could not alloc epoll array
Jun 16 16:33:57 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6537]: CRITICAL:core:tcp_receive_loop:
exiting...
Jun 16 16:33:57 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6541]: CRITICAL:core:receive_fd: EOF
on 40
Jun 16 16:33:57 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6538]: CRITICAL:core:init_io_wait:
could not alloc epoll array
Jun 16 16:33:57 sipdev /sbin/kamailio[6538]: CRITICAL:core:tcp_receive_loop:
exiting...
No other errors that I can see.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Henning Westerholt <
henning.westerholt(a)1und1.de> wrote:
On Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009, Brandon Armstead wrote:
I'm adding a single avp test i.e.
$avp(s:some-avp-name) = 'foo!'; to a
development configuration running Kamailio revision: 5487 (1.4.3). When I
start kamailio I'm getting the following error:
Hi Brandon,
CRITICAL:core:init_io_wait: could not alloc epoll
array
I'd guess this is related to the EPOLL support that is used to efficiently
get notified when something on the file descriptor arrives, so basically its
necessary for TCP support.
As soon as I delete this AVP addition and start
her back up, she starts.
Code Snippet (io_wait.c)
606 #ifdef HAVE_EPOLL
[..]
620 #endif
I do not know enough of Kamailio CORE but it looks like something to do
with memory allocation / file descriptors? I've increased available
memory
to kamailio as well as open file limits / file
descriptors etc -- to no
avail, any help is much appreciated thanks guys!
This is really strange, i really could not imagine how an AVP operation
like this could be related to the TCP core infrastructure. Do you notice
some other (earlier) errors in the logs? Perhaps its just something that its
generated because its stop from an earlier error?
Henning