Re: amd64/185290: Dtrace does not work on -stable/10

2013-12-30 Thread Mark Johnston
The following reply was made to PR amd64/185290; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mark Johnston ma...@freebsd.org To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, robert.david.pub...@gmail.com Cc: Subject: Re: amd64/185290: Dtrace does not work on -stable/10 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 14:17:47 -0500 Hm, I've never

Re: amd64/185290: Dtrace does not work on -stable/10

2014-01-04 Thread Mark Johnston
The following reply was made to PR amd64/185290; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mark Johnston ma...@freebsd.org To: Robert David robert.david.pub...@gmail.com, bug-follo...@freebsd.org Cc: Subject: Re: amd64/185290: Dtrace does not work on -stable/10 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2014 22:34:55 -0500

Re: Booting stuck for about 10minutes

2015-02-17 Thread Mark Johnston
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Michael Fuckner mich...@fuckner.net wrote: Hi all, I have a Quanta Q71L-4U Quad Xeon E7-8850 Machine which should run FreeBSD10.1. Currently it is equipped with 512GB, but in the end it should use 3TB. I boot the bootloader and the kernel and then for about

Re: Inspect pages created after a vm_object is marked as copy-on-write

2018-07-01 Thread Mark Johnston
On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 01:34:01AM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 05:59:56PM -0400, Mark Johnston wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 10:38:21AM +0300, Mihai Carabas wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 1:52 AM, Mark Johnston wrote: > > > &

Re: Inspect pages created after a vm_object is marked as copy-on-write

2018-06-30 Thread Mark Johnston
On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 10:38:21AM +0300, Mihai Carabas wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 1:52 AM, Mark Johnston wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 11:58:31AM +0300, Elena Mihailescu wrote: > >> Is there anything I am doing wrong? Maybe I misunderstood something about > &

Re: head -r352341 example context on ThreadRipper 1950X: cpuset -n prefer:1 with -l 0-15 vs. -l 16-31 odd performance?

2019-09-26 Thread Mark Johnston
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:03:14PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: > > > On 2019-Sep-25, at 20:27, Mark Millard wrote: > > > On 2019-Sep-25, at 19:26, Mark Millard wrote: > > > >> On 2019-Sep-25, at 10:02, Mark Johnston wrote: > >> > >>>

Re: head -r352341 example context on ThreadRipper 1950X: cpuset -n prefer:1 with -l 0-15 vs. -l 16-31 odd performance?

2019-09-27 Thread Mark Johnston
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 08:37:39PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: > > > On 2019-Sep-26, at 17:05, Mark Millard wrote: > > > On 2019-Sep-26, at 13:29, Mark Johnston wrote: > >> One possibility is that these are kernel memory allocations occurring in > >>

Re: head -r352341 example context on ThreadRipper 1950X: cpuset -n prefer:1 with -l 0-15 vs. -l 16-31 odd performance?

2019-09-25 Thread Mark Johnston
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 01:28:15PM -0700, Mark Millard via freebsd-amd64 wrote: > Note: I have access to only one FreeBSD amd64 context, and > it is also my only access to a NUMA context: 2 memory > domains. A Threadripper 1950X context. Also: I have only > a head FreeBSD context on any

Re: panic: smp_targeted_tlb_shootdown: interrupts disabled - FreeBSD 12.0

2020-01-06 Thread Mark Johnston
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 11:17:10PM +0530, Rajesh Kumar wrote: > Hi, > > I am hitting the below panic when I am testing couple of my drivers. When i > looked at the source, the reason is PSL_I bit (Interrupt enabled) bit is > not set when read in "smp_targeted_tlb_shootdown" routine. But I am >