On 2013/08/06 05:15, Dave Mischler wrote:
I have an i5-2500 machine 8GB RAM now running 9.2-RC1 amd64 with the
GENERIC kernel. Today, while still running 9.2-BETA2, I updated my
source tree and started building world with idprio 31 and I looked back
a while later and all the CPU cores and disk
will
use less power, from specification:
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gt-520/specifications
It only needs 29W while GT430 needs 49W.
NVIDIA also provides their native driver for FreeBSD.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable
On 2012/2/17 16:06, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 2/16/12 11:41 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
adding jkim as he seems to be the last person working with TSC.
On 2/16/12 6:42 PM, David Xu wrote:
On 2012/2/17 10:19, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 2/16/12 5:56 PM, David Xu wrote:
On 2012/2/17 8:42
On 2012/2/18 9:30, Julian Elischer wrote:
mine is too, yet it still has problems..
CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5420 @ 2.50GHz (2500.14-MHz
K8-class CPU)
Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0x10676 Family = 6 Model = 17
Stepping = 6
On 2012/2/17 8:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
Adding David Xu for his thoughts since he reqrote the code in quesiton
in revision 213098
On 2/16/12 2:57 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 2/16/12 1:06 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 2/16/12 9:34 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 15/02/2012 23:41 Julian
On 2012/2/17 9:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
kern.timecounter.tick: 1
kern.timecounter.choice: TSC-low(1000) i8254(0) HPET(950)
ACPI-fast(900) dummy(-100)
kern.timecounter.hardware: ACPI-fast
kern.timecounter.stepwarnings: 0
switching the machine from TSC_low to ACPI-fast fixes the
On 2012/2/17 10:19, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 2/16/12 5:56 PM, David Xu wrote:
On 2012/2/17 8:42, Julian Elischer wrote:
Adding David Xu for his thoughts since he reqrote the code in
quesiton in revision 213098
On 2/16/12 2:57 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 2/16/12 1:06 PM, Julian Elischer
On 2012/2/17 10:42, David Xu wrote:
aybe following code can check to see if TSC-LOW works by let the
thread run
on each cpu.
refresh:
gettimeofday(prev, NULL);
int cpu = 0;
for (;;) {
cpuset_t set;
cpu = ++cpu % 4;
CPU_ZERO(set);
CPU_SET(cpu, set
machine which is running gnome and other GUI
applications,
for a heavy GUI deskkop, I would tune it up to 224 to get better result.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
Sigh, pressing ScrollLock key several times can lock up the
kernel when it is still booting before /sbin/init runs.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any
is sharing L2 cache,
but in fact, the design of the Pentium Ds was simply two P4 cores
sitting side by side. They do not share anything and they basically work
independently.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http
Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 09:48:25AM +0800, David Xu wrote:
Tijl Coosemans wrote:
On Friday 15 January 2010 02:31:22 David Xu wrote:
Tijl Coosemans wrote:
Besides weird formatting of procstat -k output, I do not see
anything wrong in the state of the process
Tijl Coosemans wrote:
On Friday 15 January 2010 02:31:22 David Xu wrote:
Tijl Coosemans wrote:
Besides weird formatting of procstat -k output, I do not see
anything wrong in the state of the process. It got SIGSTOP, I am
sure. Attaching gdb helps because debugger gets signal reports
threads can remove the signal, and here
your sigqueue_take(ksi) is dangerous code.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr
Daniel Eischen wrote:
Hmm, agreed. But note that Solaris 10 does it this way:
#definepthread_cleanup_push(routine, args) { \
_cleanup_t _cleanup_info; \
__pthread_cleanup_push((_Voidfp)(routine), (void *)(args), \
(caddr_t)_getfp(), _cleanup_info);
#define
, when thread #1 unlocks the
mutex and unblocks thread #1, the thread #2's priority will be raised
and it preempts thread #1, the thread #2 then acquires the mutex,
that's how it balances between fairness and performance.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd
Andriy Gapon wrote:
Maybe. But that's not what I see with my small example program. One
thread releases and re-acquires a mutex 10 times in a row while the
other doesn't get it a single time.
I think that there is a very slim chance of a blocked thread
preempting a running thread in this
enough if thread scheduler is sane, so we don't raise
priority in kernel umtx code if a thread is blocked, this gives
thread #1 some times to re-acquire the mutex without context switches,
increases throughput.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable
/contrib/gcc/gthr-posix.h.diff?r1=1.1.1.8;r2=1.1.1.8.4.1;f=h
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, an error number is
returned to indicate the error.
...
ERRORS
...
The pthread_mutexattr_settype() function will fail if:
[EINVAL] Invalid value for attr, or invalid value for type.
Fixed, thanks!
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all!
The function sem_timedwait exist in FreeBSD? Which version? I see something
in this list, but dated of 2004, and the manual pages don't show nothing...
Fabio Luis Girardi
I am working on it.
Regards,
David Xu
at the line but I am not any wiser. Any
ideas what's wrong?
--
VH
In most time, this means the program is abusing mutex in child
process or signal handler.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 20:22, Dmitriy Kirhlarov wrote:
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:18:52AM +0800, David Xu wrote:
On Thursday 16 November 2006 19:15, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 01:24:36PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
T I wonder why UMA was suspected
is not in thread suspension code.
Regards,
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday 16 November 2006 19:15, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 01:24:36PM +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
T I wonder why UMA was suspected to be the problem. Dima gave
T me access to the core. Here are more details from the trace:
It looks like a race between two threads in
On Saturday 21 October 2006 14:56, John E Hein wrote:
David, here's the original report.
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2006-October/029755.html
Indeed, as Kostik surmised, the mount point is mounted intr.
I did not notice this problem while running with releng_6 from
On Saturday 21 October 2006 11:57, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 08:25:00AM +0800, David Xu wrote:
On Thursday 19 October 2006 18:04, Kostik Belousov wrote:
The nfs_reply is sleeping with the PCATCH set. The question is why
SIGTSTP does not cause msleep to return
On Saturday 21 October 2006 15:22, John E Hein wrote:
David Xu wrote at 15:10 +0800 on Oct 21, 2006:
This is also RELENG_4's behavior, if PCATCH is set, the tsleep will
call CURSIG() which will suspends current process if there is a
SIGTSTP or SIGSTOP signal.
Great. Suspending
to stop unless the signal
is masked by sigprocmask or the signal has an action handler been set,
this is a correct behavior.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe
thread_suspend_check itself has problem.
I see this diff. I'm not sure it will help, but is there any reason
not to try it in 6 (David Xu CC'd since he made this change)?
Index: kern_thread.c
===
RCS file: /base/FreeBSD-CVS/src/sys/kern
在 Friday 31 March 2006 08:38，Daniel O'Connor 写道：
On Wednesday 22 March 2006 23:49, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
On Wednesday 22 March 2006 18:41, David Xu wrote:
The problem is that every now and then the process gets stuck and
becomes unkillable just after forking, ie..
Are you using
it shows TIMEOUT error, system
freezes while resetting the NIC, but still works.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
my NIC to not work anymore, though I still saw
timeout without this change, I think this varies from hardware
revision to revision, unpredictable at all.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo
pthreads ?
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 14 March 2006 15:27, Martin wrote:
David Xu wrote:
Can anyone add this to 6.1 todo list ? this definitely should be fixed
before
6.1R.
One of my friends also has found kern/94278:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=94278
There is no comment on it so far
with well defined vnode interface ?
why did someone want to break the well defined FILE-vnode-fs-device
layers ? sigh.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail
On Tuesday 14 March 2006 01:39, Martin wrote:
Martin wrote:
David Xu wrote:
This bug unlikely should be reported on thread@, your code is a fork
bomb, I think it is a warning why recent days the kernel crashed by
such attack, can you reproduce it on 6.0 ?
6.0R seems to work fine
--
Martin
This bug unlikely should be reported on thread@, your code is a fork
bomb, I think it is a warning why recent days the kernel crashed by
such attack, can you reproduce it on 6.0 ?
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http
several test cases,
gl description and patch for the problem.
Thanks, added just now. Will this description do?
--
| Hiroki SATO
Please add:
'calcru: runtime went backwards' bug for threaded program.
David Xu
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
: nve_oslockacquire: normal mutex not held
nve0: nve_oslockrelease: normal mutex not held
ciphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, 1000baseT,
1000baseT-FDX, auto
nve0: Ethernet address: 00:04:61:fe:fb:7f
of course, it does not work, it had never worked.
David Xu
Thanks, problem disappeared.
but why prints /dev/net/nsmb*?
--
David Xu
Dimitry Andric wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2001-12-25 at 06:28:49 David Xu wrote:
DX smbfs: can't get handle to requester (no /dev/net/nsmb* device)
The problem is that the required
I have cvsuped to today's source, make buildworld and installworld,
when mount a smbfs mount point, it prints:
smbfs: can't get handle to requester (no /dev/net/nsmb* device)
what 's wrong?
--
David Xu
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-stable
Sorry,
but why do you think many sysctls are designed for change them frequently?
add a sysctl to system is a more convenience way. this is an old topic, I don't
want to say more. there was already in mail list archive.
--
David Xu
- Original Message -
From: Kazutaka YOKOTA [EMAIL
heck even more out of this one since we're
JH only 12 days away from the final release candidate! :)
JH Thanks,
JH - Jordan
Thanks, I would like suggest peoples have patch ready for 4.3 should
commit them as soon as possible to let user test them.
--
Best regards,
David Xu
To Unsubscribe:
44 matches
Mail list logo
