AW: g_vfs_done():da3s1a[READ(offset=81064794762854400, length=8192)]error = 5

we are trying to diagnose errors seen on 6.2, SMP, amd64, cvsup'ed of 2007-10-09 Mainboard is a Tyan Thunder h2000M (S3992-E) with 16 GB RAM and 2 x Opteron 2216, da3 is on a 3ware 9550-12 we are seeing this error: g_vfs_done():da3s1a[READ(offset=81064794762854400,

AW: g_vfs_done():da3s1a[READ(offset=81064794762854400, length=8192)]error = 5

One basic question to ask: where does the value for offset= in g_vfs_done() come from ? Either from the file system or from bugs in the code. I don't remember seeing similar reports before so the probability of there being bugs in the code is fairly small. This is all on raw

Re: g_vfs_done():da3s1a[READ(offset=81064794762854400, length=8192)]error = 5

On 15/10/2007, d_elbracht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One basic question to ask: where does the value for offset= in g_vfs_done() come from ? Either from the file system or from bugs in the code. I don't remember seeing similar reports before so the probability of there being bugs in the code is

Disk Quota Support for FreeBSD Kernel

Dear All, I am new to FreeBSD and I need a help from you all please.. I have installed FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE and did Binary Security Update from freebsd-update. Then I have tried to rebuild the kernel with Disk Quota support, but kernel source was not available in my new server. I gave a try

Re: Question about 'top' values on memory usage

Artem Kuchin wrote: Hello! Maybe someone with deeper knowledge of the internals of FreeBSD can clean up something for me (any for many others)^ Here are lines from my top: PID USERNAMETHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 9258 hordelo_ru1 40 40992K 4260K

2G+ sysv shm segments

Two years ago Christian S.J. Peron had increased total number of SysV shm pages on 64-bit platform, that allows to create many shm segments more than 2G in sum. However, the patch does not allow to create a single large segment more than 2G. The attached patches against 6.x and 7.x allow to create

Re: Disk Quota Support for FreeBSD Kernel

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 06:09:02PM +0530, Chaminda Indrajith wrote: Dear All, Hi, I am new to FreeBSD and I need a help from you all please.. I have installed FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE and did Binary Security Update from freebsd-update. Then I have tried to rebuild the kernel with Disk

Re: Question about 'top' values on memory usage

William LeFebvre wrote: Artem Kuchin wrote: Hello! Maybe someone with deeper knowledge of the internals of FreeBSD can clean up something for me (any for many others)^ Here are lines from my top: PID USERNAMETHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 9258 hordelo_ru1

amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

Hi. I have 3 Dell 2850 with DELL PERC4 SCSI RAID5 6x300GB running lighttpd serving flash video at around 200Mbit/s. %grep amr /var/run/dmesg.boot amr0: LSILogic MegaRAID 1.53 mem 0xf80f-0xf80f,0xfe9c-0xfe9f irq 46 at device 14.0 on pci2 amr0: Using 64-bit DMA amr0: delete

Re: usb stick problem

From: Alson van der Meulen [EMAIL PROTECTED] This sounds like the documented behavior if the drive was empty or had no long filenames when you mounted it. From mount_msdosfs(8): If neither -s nor -l are given, mount_msdosfs searches the root

Re: Question about 'top' values on memory usage, now threads

Artem Kuchin wrote: CPU is more than just enough in my case. There will a a lot https sitting there but load, i am sure, will be low. If the load is low then you may not need very many processes. Swapping is simply unacceptable, so i am counting only real physical ram. Whether there is

Re: usb stick problem

From: Alson van der Meulen [EMAIL PROTECTED] This sounds like the documented behavior if the drive was empty or had no long filenames when you mounted it. From mount_msdosfs(8): If neither -s nor -l are given, mount_msdosfs searches the root

Re: Question about 'top' values on memory usage, now threads

William LeFebvre wrote: Artem Kuchin wrote: CPU is more than just enough in my case. There will a a lot https sitting there but load, i am sure, will be low. If the load is low then you may not need very many processes. They belong to different sites ;) so they need to be run constantly and

can I do 6.1-RELEASE to 6.2 via cvsup

I should just be able to change the TAG in standard-supfile from 6_1 to 6_2, do a cvsup, and the builds etc to end up with 6.2-RELEASE right? yes? no? ta rob ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: can I do 6.1-RELEASE to 6.2 via cvsup

I should just be able to change the TAG in standard-supfile from 6_1 to 6_2, do a cvsup, and the builds etc to end up with 6.2-RELEASE right? yes? no? Yep: 1. make buildworld 2. make buildkernel (add KERNCONF=mykernel to /etc/make.conf) 3. mergemaster -p 4. make installkernel 5. shutdown -r

Re: Reproducable, possibly NFS related, fatal double fault in 6.2-R-p7

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 02:37:23PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote: Esa Karkkainen wrote: I get Fatal double fault error when writing to a filesystem mounted from NFS server. I got an offlist reply in which he suggested that the problem might be in nve driver. I installed an additional Intel

Re: Question about 'top' values on memory usage

* William LeFebvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071015 06:49] wrote: Unfortunately, freebsd does not appear to track the amount of shared virtual memory for each process. It could be obtained by walking through all the pages in a process's vm map, but that would really slow top down. I don't know

Re: can I do 6.1-RELEASE to 6.2 via cvsup

Robert Chalmers escribió: I should just be able to change the TAG in standard-supfile from 6_1 to 6_2, do a cvsup, and the builds etc to end up with 6.2-RELEASE right? yes? no? ta rob ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: Reproducable, possibly NFS related, fatal double fault in 6.2-R-p7

Esa Karkkainen wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 02:37:23PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote: Esa Karkkainen wrote: I get Fatal double fault error when writing to a filesystem mounted from NFS server. I got an offlist reply in which he suggested that the problem might be in nve driver. I

Re: amrd disk performance drop after running under high load

Alexey Popov wrote: After some time of running under high load disk performance become expremely poor. At that periods 'systat -vm 1' shows something like this: What does high load mean? You need to explain the system workload more. Disks amrd0 KB/t 85.39 tps 5 MB/s 0.38 % busy

Re: Reproducable, possibly NFS related, fatal double fault in 6.2-R-p7

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 11:32:02PM +0300, Esa Karkkainen wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 02:37:23PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote: Esa Karkkainen wrote: I get Fatal double fault error when writing to a filesystem mounted from NFS server. I got an offlist reply in which he suggested

Re: Question about 'top' values on memory usage

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 03:08:36PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: * William LeFebvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071015 06:49] wrote: Unfortunately, freebsd does not appear to track the amount of shared virtual memory for each process. It could be obtained by walking through all the pages in a

[HEADSUP] preparations for ports release for 7.0

This is a pointer to the headsup I posted to freebsd-ports@ detailing the switch of portsmon's default build environment from i386-6 to i386-7. This controls such things as determination of whether a port is marked broken (e.g. with gcc4.2.) The first set of email reminders based on this have

Re: device_attach: smist0 attach returned 6

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 06:21:43PM +0100, Rick wrote: Oct 15 11:26:20 metahusky kernel: smist0: SpeedStep SMI on cpu0 Oct 15 11:26:20 metahusky kernel: device_attach: smist0 attach returned 6 Oct 15 11:26:20 metahusky kernel: smist1: SpeedStep SMI on cpu1 Oct 15 11:26:20 metahusky kernel: