Updating from 11.2p10 to p11 fails to builld /sbin/rescue on DIR_ROUNDUP

Hello all, In the course of updating from FreeBSD 11.2p10 to p11, we receive the following error message from buildworld: clang -O2 -pipe -I/usr/src/sbin/fsck_ffs -I/usr/src/sbin/mount -DRESCUE -MD -MF.depend.dir.o -MTdir.o -std=gnu99 -fstack-protector-strong -Wsystem-headers -Werror -Wall

Re: Call for Testing: 11.1-RELEASE Meltdown/Spectre mitigation merge

On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Joseph Mulloy wrote: > /usr/src/sys/amd64/amd64/genassym.c:194:16: error: offsetof of incomplete > type ‘struct pti_frame' This might be the error you get if frame.h did not patch correctly. It’s a known issue with the patch (the

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:28 PM, Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk wrote: Does vmstat -m or vmstat -z shed any light? None, as those show kernel memory usage, not user space. Looking at them anyway shows nothing unusual, consuming large amounts of memory, or disproportionate to the kernel

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Chris H bsd-li...@bsdforge.com wrote: As Kevin already noted; stopping firefox, and starting it again, seems the only solution. The machines in questions are servers, they do not run Firefox or any GUI. And whatever is using the memory does not show up on ps or

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 7:52 PM, J David j.david.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: There are a lot of possibilities to create persistent anonymous shared memory objects. Not complete list is tmpfs mounts, swap-backed md

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

In our case, On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Kevin Oberman rkober...@gmail.com wrote: This is just a shot in the dark and not a really likely one, but I have had issues with Firefox leaking memory badly. I can free the space by killing firefox and restarting it. In our case, we can log in

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:39 PM, The Lost Admin thelostad...@gmail.com wrote: Have you looked through the system shutdown scripts (part of init/rc) to see what happens after the uptime is printed? that might give you a lead. All of that output is printed by the kernel (see

Re: Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: There are a lot of possibilities to create persistent anonymous shared memory objects. Not complete list is tmpfs mounts, swap-backed md disks, sysv shared memory, possibly posix shared memory (I do not remember

Significant memory leak in 9.3p10?

Recently we have seen a large-scale memory leak on amd64 machines running FreeBSD 9.3-RELEASE-p10. This was first observed on 9.3p2 but has since shown up all the way through p10. Here's what the header of top shows: last pid: 32329; load averages: 0.00, 0.01, 0.21up 3+15:37:29

Re: 9.2-PRE: switch off that stupid Nakatomi Socrates

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:57 PM, David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com wrote: Seriously, I don't understand why people waste time to create jokes like that instead of working on serious issues. You may think I'm putting to much significance on this kind of matter but I like (and I'm not the

Re: zfs_enable vs zfs_load in loader.conf (but neither works)

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: Unfortunately, I am not sure if it is possible to obtain anu useful information from ddb and saving a crash dump is not possible in pre-init environment. I could write a patch that would print some useful debugging info.

Re: zfs_enable vs zfs_load in loader.conf (but neither works)

Thanks very much for the info Andriy. On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: Another piece of information is that neither mountpoint nor canmount property affects ZFS root mounting. It is mountpoint=legacy that boots on this machine and mountpoint=/ that can't

Re: zfs_enable vs zfs_load in loader.conf (but neither works)

On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: You can use zfs.root.mountfrom=zfs:data/root in /boot/loader.conf instead of an fstab entry. That has been in loader.conf the whole time. Mountpoint=legacy is required either way. It isn't. There is another

Small bug in sys/kern/vfs_mountroot.c

In releng/9.2 (and possibly other versions), in kern/vfs_mountroot.c, in parse_mount, there appears to be a small bug. The expression sizeof(errmsg) is used in a strlcpy. This would work if errmsg were an array, but it's a char*, so sizeof() returns the pointer's size and this limits the error

zfs_enable vs zfs_load in loader.conf (but neither works)

After setting up a new machine to boot from a ZFS root using the 9.1 install, it worked fine, but when the kernel world was updated to releng/9.2, it stopped booting. The pool is called data and the root partition is data/root. Under 9.1 it had in loader.conf: zfs_load=YES

Re: zfs_enable vs zfs_load in loader.conf (but neither works)

On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 10:22 PM, Darren Pilgrim list_free...@bluerosetech.com wrote: Did you build and install new boot blocks? Yes. Oddly, setting: zfs set mountpoint=legacy data/root (plus the appropriate fstab entry) instead of zfs set mountpoint=/ data/root seems to produce a bootable

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote: Does -HEAD have this same problem? If I understood kib@ correctly, this is fixed in -HEAD by r253927. If so, we should likely just revert the patch entirely from -HEAD and -9 until it's resolved. It was not too difficult

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

The requested information about the deadlock was finally obtained and provided off-list to the requested parties due to size. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: I think the easiest route is to a partial merge of the r253927 from HEAD. Is it helpful if we restart testing releng/9.2 using your suggested fix? And if so, the IGN_SBUSY patch you posted earlier be applied as well

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: No, at least not without reverting the r254754 first. The IGN_SBUSY patch is not critical there. There is lots of other stuff in r250907 / reverted by r254754. Some of it looks important for sendfile()

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 04:11:09PM -0400, J David wrote: On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote: No, at least not without reverting the r254754 first. The IGN_SBUSY patch

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

Now that a kernel with INVARIANTS/WITNESS is finally available on a machine with serial console I am having terrible trouble provoking this to happen. (Machine grinds to a halt if I put the usual test load on it due to all the debug code in the kernel.) Did get this interesting LOR, though it

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

One deadlocked process cropped up overnight, but I managed to panic the box before getting too much debugging info. :( The process was in state T instead of D, which I guess must be a side effect of some of the debugging code compiled in. Here are the details I was able to capture: db show

Re: Update to 9.2-PRERELEASE, what is this?

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote: On Sun, 18 Aug 2013, David Demelier wrote: http://files.malikania.fr/DSC_0223.jpg What's that? Is this a joke? Yes, sort of. This is fantastic. Kudos and thanks for the laugh to whoever snuck it in there. After

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Rick Macklem rmack...@uoguelph.ca wrote: Have you been able to pass the debugging info on to Kostik? It would be really nice to get this fixed for FreeBSD9.2. You're probably not talking to me, but headway here is slow. At our location, we have been continuing

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 4:08 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: Could you please hack gpt_checkhdr() in sys/boot/common/part.c to print all the relevant values for this check and try bootparttest again? Your wish is my command: --- common/part.c.orig 2013-08-05 19:00:49.536868414 +

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov a...@freebsd.org wrote: can you please dump first 34 blocks from da2 and send to me? Will send off-list. Also, it is interesting, what tool did you use for partitioning? Unfortunately I'm not sure. This pool may have been created on Solaris.

Re: unexpected idprio 31 behavior on 9.2-BETA2 and 9.2-RC1

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Eric van Gyzen e...@vangyzen.net wrote: on an otherwise idle amd64 system with 4 CPUs. The first command in the build.log file: rm -rf /usr/obj/home/freebsd/tmp took over three minutes. It should have taken about three /seconds/. uptime reported a load

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Andrey V. Elsukov bu7c...@yandex.ru wrote: looking to your `zfs status` output and this, we can see, that GPT wasn't detected on most of disks. Can you try to boot with this loader: http://people.freebsd.org/~ae/zfsloader It's from 10-CURRENT and was build with

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Mark Saad nones...@longcount.org wrote: Is there any updates on this issue ? Has anyone tested it or see it happen on the release candidate ? It's a bit premature for that; the RC has been out for a few hours. We put BETA2 on 25 nodes and only saw the problem

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: Very unusual. Would you be able to try 9.2 zfsloader again? Surely. I would like to see values of loaddev, currdev and vfs.zfs.boot.primary_pool loader variables (if any are set). These can be obtained using 'show' command

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, J David j.david.li...@gmail.com wrote: OK show vfs.zfs.boot.primary_pool 2022708996989799150 I should add that this is indeed the correct guid for the pool: $ zpool get guid NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE data guid 2022708996989799150 default Thanks

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:01 PM, J David j.david.li...@gmail.com wrote: I should add that this is indeed the correct guid for the pool: $ zpool get guid NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE data guid 2022708996989799150 default After a full make buildworld installworld, I finally got

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Trond Endrestøl trond.endres...@fagskolen.gjovik.no wrote: I'll try the 8.4-R - 9.2-BETA2 route later this afternoon, and avoid updating the boot blocks with the ones from 9.2-BETA2. That leaves the raidz2 configuration unexplored. Thanks for looking into this.

Re: Please remove Perl from ports

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Stephen Montgomery-Smith step...@missouri.edu wrote: When I get into this kind of bad situation, I usually do something slightly less drastic: # pkg_delete -a This is similar to what we do. However, we add the following step: pkg info -qoa | sort

Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

In order to test ZFS on the upcoming 9.2 release, we upgraded a non-production 8.4 root-on-ZFS fileserver to 9.2-BETA2. The result was a non-bootable system. The first problem was gptzfsboot, but that was our fault… it never got upgraded when we switched to feature flags. So some time with the

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Trond Endrestøl trond.endres...@fagskolen.gjovik.no wrote: I'm curious as to why you use da?p1 as the freebsd-zfs partitions. Those are whole-disk partitions. Where does the freebsd-boot partition reside? da?p2? Only the log and cache disks have boot and swap

Re: Strange sendmail behaviour after upgrade to 9.1-BETA2

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Pavel Timofeev tim...@gmail.com wrote: I've just installed new fresh 9.2-BETA2 amd64 on another machine. Same behavior - Sendmail asks DNS only for record of mx server. We also noticed one of our machines suddenly started using IPv6 to send outbound email

Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Shane Ambler free...@shaneware.biz wrote: I think that 8M partition looks weird. It looks like a leftover from a previous config? We leave some space at the end of drives in case we need to change drive vendors. Sometimes vendor A's drives are a few sectors

Re: Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories

Half the people will say: There should be more stuff in base! The other half will say: There should be less stuff in base! People don't generally change each other's minds about this because they start from competing definitions of what is good that are 100% opinion in nature. (Spoken as a

Re: NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1

If it is helpful, we have 25 nodes testing the 9.2-BETA1 build and without especially trying to exercise this bug, we found sendfile()-using processes deadlocked in WCHAN newnfs on 5 of the 25 nodes. The ones with highest uptime (about 3 days) seem most affected, so it does seem like a sooner or

Re: Clang 3.3 libc++ problem on 9-STABLE

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote: I missed one additional patch, which I imported in r253042. Yes, I pulled that rev into my -STABLE and rebuilt and it is fine now. Thanks for your help and to you and everyone for all the hard work on clang! I strongly

Clang 3.3 libc++ problem on 9-STABLE

With SVN version r253119, we are seeing strange errors from iostream while attempting to use the new clang 3.3 with libc++ on 9-STABLE. This program: --- start here -- #include iostream int main() { std::cout This is a test. std::endl; return 0; }

Re: Phantom nulls in usbdevs.h during 9-STABLE kernel build

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.comwrote: Try to apply r252528 and see if it helps. OK, I svn up'd to get the clang changes and applied this patch as well. (Built tree off of local /usr/obj to avoid hitting the problem while building with the patch.) So

Re: Phantom nulls in usbdevs.h during 9-STABLE kernel build

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote: So the actual file does *not* have any NUL characters in it? What happens if you run e.g. sha1(1) over it a million times? Based on this suggestion, I wrote a script to sha256 usbdevs.h every 0.25 seconds and did another

Re: Phantom nulls in usbdevs.h during 9-STABLE kernel build

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote: One other thing: which type of file system are you using for /usr/obj, or wherever you pointed $MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX? Also ZFS-over-NFS. The goal is to build on one machine and install on many. I was able to reproduce this

Phantom nulls in usbdevs.h during 9-STABLE kernel build

We are seeing strange problems building the kernel on 9-STABLE. The problem is intermittent and will go away if we build enough times in a row without making any changes. The problem seems to be that the usbdevs.h file (which appears to be automatically generated) gets random NULL bytes in it.