Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    2.4.5.a.20200110.1421 and earlier: High CPU usage from pfctl

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
    112 Posts 33 Posters 33.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • C
      carl2187 @jimp
      last edited by

      @jimp amazing detective work to have already isolated it down to a specific upstream change in freebsd!

      Please let the community know if theres anything we can do to help, test, build kernels etc.

      Thanks for all you do!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • luckman212L
        luckman212 LAYER 8
        last edited by luckman212

        Seems like the fix for this will land in 2.4.5-p1 which is coming soon. But, this person was desperate. So as a test, I put the following in their /boot/loader.conf.local:

        kern.smp.disabled=1
        

        After rebooting, the problem is gone. It's only been an hour, but not a single hiccup so far (🤞fingers crossed).This is on an SG-3100.

        nzkiwi68N 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • Cool_CoronaC
          Cool_Corona
          last edited by Cool_Corona

          I can confirm this fixes the issue completely!

          Its not enough to edit -> system -> tunables.

          You have to edit /boot/loader.conf.local manually.

          Its the same as limiting a VM to only 1 core.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • nzkiwi68N
            nzkiwi68 @luckman212
            last edited by

            kern.smp.disabled=1
            

            After rebooting, the problem is gone. It's only been an hour, but not a single hiccup so far (🤞fingers crossed).This is on an SG-3100.

            But, a quick look online suggests to me that this is disabling all multi CPU support. On busy systems this could be a problem switching your multi core (example XG-1537 with 8 cores plus hyper threading) into a single CPU system!

            I recommend if you can wait on 2.4.4-p3 or limp along on 2.4.5 if you can.

            For me, I shall wait for the official patch / release.

            luckman212L 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • luckman212L
              luckman212 LAYER 8 @nzkiwi68
              last edited by

              @nzkiwi68 said in 2.4.5.a.20200110.1421 and earlier: High CPU usage from pfctl:

              this is disabling all multi CPU support [..] I recommend if you can wait on 2.4.4-p3 or limp along on 2.4.5 if you can.

              100% good advice. In this case I had to upgrade due to another problem, so I was "stuck" on 2.4.5 with a remote system and had no other option. When 2.4.5-p1 / 2.5.0 come out this should not be needed. Losing 1 core is a fair trade for regaining the stability.

              Cool_CoronaC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Cool_CoronaC
                Cool_Corona @luckman212
                last edited by

                @luckman212

                Agreed. Limiting to 1 core is a viable option on a home network or on a small B2B setup. A busy connection running IDS/IPS would be running full load and not have spare ressources left.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • D
                  DD @luckman212
                  last edited by

                  @luckman212 In version 2.5 everything is working ok. I switched from 2.4.4-p3 to 2.4.5 and I have problem with this bug (my FW is on Hyper-V), then I switched to 2.5 and everything is ok. This week was pfSense 2.5 changed to FreeBSD 12.1-STABLE.

                  Mr_JinXM 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Mr_JinXM
                    Mr_JinX @DD
                    last edited by Mr_JinX

                    @DD I've just done a clean install from the latest public download, and it shows FreeBSD version 11.3 stable, on their site it shows 12.0 stable https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/releases/versions-of-pfsense-and-freebsd.html

                    Update:
                    I've just updated to the development release and it's now running 12.1 stable, do we believe the issues are not present in FreeBSD 12.1 stable?

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • G
                      ghosterius
                      last edited by

                      Is there any development on this situation? Are we having some 2.4.5_p1 coming up soon to solve this?
                      I have the pfSense running on an Hyper-V and there's absolutely nothing I can do on the pfSense without having an huge impact (outage, traffic gone, website and console unresponsive).

                      I've attempted reverting back to 2.4.4_p3 but... unfortunately you guys removed the image available for me to reinstall it so... oops!

                      provelsP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • jimpJ
                        jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                        last edited by

                        Read the thread. All the info is here. At least read from https://forum.netgate.com/post/908806 down.

                        Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                        Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                        Do not Chat/PM for help!

                        G 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • G
                          ghosterius @jimp
                          last edited by

                          @jimp said in 2.4.5.a.20200110.1421 and earlier: High CPU usage from pfctl:

                          Read the thread. All the info is here. At least read from https://forum.netgate.com/post/908806 down.

                          Instead of replying arrogantly, why not assuming I've just done that 5 times and try to give a more "to the point" answer?
                          Why do you think I am asking if there's any development over this situation? Maybe because of your post stating that you're "assessing the next steps" (the same you just gave me a link to go and read again...).

                          Reducing my system to a single core installation is not doable (done that... performance went to the ground) and unfortunately reducing the tables to 65000 entries makes pfBlockerNG go wild and start throwing errors.

                          So... Expecting any development over this situation? is there any kind of patch we can do? can we "override" the setting that exists that causes this problem?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • jimpJ
                            jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                            last edited by

                            While terse, my response was not "arrogant". It's not arrogant to expect people to read a thread with all of the information (and links to more information). Far too often people pop in and expect others to do the leg work for them when all of the information is here. If you'd read from my linked post down and followed the links, you'd have all your answers. I just skimmed them and checked. The info is here, and in the links (Like https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/10414 linked in https://forum.netgate.com/post/909130).

                            There are multiple comments with suggested workarounds and how to enact them.

                            Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                            Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                            Do not Chat/PM for help!

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • G
                              ghosterius
                              last edited by

                              Working in IT as I do, I understand your point and where you're coming from... However would have been much nicer to start with a: "Have you read the thread already? Did you notice that we've already pointed to possible workarounds?"
                              To which I'd reply that I've seen the workarounds and that none of them work for me (unfortunately I must add) at least without having another impact....

                              Thanks for the link to the redmine part, I did not notice that one previously, apologies!

                              I've noticed that there's a patch for the kernel and good results are visible... Do we know or have an idea when that's coming out?

                              Thanks for your time.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • jimpJ
                                jimp Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate
                                last edited by

                                We don't all have time to be nice, especially when there is no indication of what the person posting has done. If you had included the additional info about exactly what you had tried in your first comment, that would have been even more helpful. We're not mind readers.

                                The workarounds do work, at a possible performance penalty (hurts different deployments worse than others). The main workaround is reducing the CPU cores to 1, which is mentioned several times, and that will work 100% of the time for everyone. If that was too much of a performance hit, then you will need to disable all the large tables, move it to hardware with faster single cores, or go back to 2.4.4-p3.

                                No ETA on 2.4.5-p1 other than "Soon" (as in Weeks, not months). Still some testing left to do on other issues being rolled into 2.4.5-p1 to address other issues discovered in the release.

                                Remember: Upvote with the 👍 button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

                                Need help fast? Netgate Global Support!

                                Do not Chat/PM for help!

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • provelsP
                                  provels @ghosterius
                                  last edited by

                                  @ghosterius said in 2.4.5.a.20200110.1421 and earlier: High CPU usage from pfctl:

                                  Is there any development on this situation? Are we having some 2.4.5_p1 coming up soon to solve this?
                                  I have the pfSense running on an Hyper-V and there's absolutely nothing I can do on the pfSense without having an huge impact (outage, traffic gone, website and console unresponsive).

                                  I've attempted reverting back to 2.4.4_p3 but... unfortunately you guys removed the image available for me to reinstall it so... oops!

                                  Sure. Just reduce to one virtual CPU. EOF

                                  Peder

                                  MAIN - pfSense+ 24.11-RELEASE - Adlink MXE-5401, i7, 16 GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. 500 GB HDD for SyslogNG
                                  BACKUP - pfSense+ 23.01-RELEASE - Hyper-V Virtual Machine, Gen 1, 2 v-CPUs, 3 GB RAM, 8GB VHDX (Dynamic)

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • T
                                    tomahhunt
                                    last edited by

                                    So glad I found this thread.
                                    I have had this with my 2.4.5 install using proxmox.
                                    Now reverted to 1 core for the time being which seems to just about cope.
                                    Thread followed to watch out for 2.4.5-p1.
                                    Thanks for debugging this guys!

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • RicoR
                                      Rico LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance
                                      last edited by

                                      https://redmine.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/roadmap#2.4.5-p1 looks very soon. 🤗

                                      -Rico

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                                      • kiokomanK
                                        kiokoman LAYER 8
                                        last edited by

                                        No ETA on 2.4.5-p1 other than "Soon" (as in Weeks, not months)

                                        looks very soon.

                                        now you have done it.. 😂
                                        it seems that @techpro2004 is still away ... I'm sure he will come back to ask.. when ... "Soon" (as in Weeks, not months)!

                                        ̿' ̿'\̵͇̿̿\з=(◕_◕)=ε/̵͇̿̿/'̿'̿ ̿
                                        Please do not use chat/PM to ask for help
                                        we must focus on silencing this @guest character. we must make up lies and alter the copyrights !
                                        Don't forget to Upvote with the 👍 button for any post you find to be helpful.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                                        • RicoR
                                          Rico LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance
                                          last edited by

                                          I bet he can't be far away since at least you now pinged him.
                                          bazinga.gif

                                          -Rico

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • T
                                            tomahhunt
                                            last edited by

                                            I love that I am very new to this forum but still know exaclty what you are talking about.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.