Hello,
[ .. stuff deleted .. ]
I have recompiled the kernel with ULE, and it seems fine as well. I
ran 160 iterations of a 300MB file and there was no corruption. Same
process - copy a junk random file over nfs mount, unmount the nfs
mount, remount it copy it back, compare the
Hello,
Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 02:35 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Also, you are using ULE or the 4BSD scheduler ? I
still have 4BSD on the box I am testing on.
Interesting, this is with ULE. I didn't really test 4BSD on this
box (I believed those who
* Jeremy Chadwick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I added it directly to the 2nd CPU (diagram on page 9 of
http://www.tyan.com/manuals/m_s2895_101.pdf) and the problem
seems to be the interaction between nfe0 and powerd :
That board is the weirdest thing I've seen in years.
K8WE's a
2008/4/23 Pyun YongHyeon [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:13:44AM +0400, pluknet wrote:
On 22/04/2008, Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 02:00 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
At 05:57 PM 4/21/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Hi,
How long does it take for the problem to show up ?
Less than an hour in general (running the same client script
simultanuously on a 100Mbps linux box and 1Gbps bds6-x86)
I am running my nic at gig speeds only... I recompiled the kernel
Hello,
Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 05:57 PM 4/21/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Hi,
How long does it take for the problem to show up ?
Less than an hour in general (running the same client script
simultanuously on a 100Mbps linux box and 1Gbps bds6-x86)
I am running
At 01:38 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
I'm out of office tomorrow but will try to find time tommorow evening
to test with another NIC.
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
nfe thats in RELENG_7 ?
---Mike
Hello,
Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 08:30:48PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
NB, (CC to kris@ for this) why is memtest86 port marked as i386-only?
Basically because it's a bootable i386 binary image.
yop, but building it could be allowed on more archs
Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 01:38 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
I'm out of office tomorrow but will try to find time tommorow evening
to test with another NIC.
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
nfe thats in RELENG_7 ?
Think so :
At 02:00 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
nfe thats in RELENG_7 ?
Think so :
OK, and it is the latest RELENG_7 ? Or just the if_nfe.c file has
been manually updated ? Also, you are using ULE or the 4BSD scheduler
re,
Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 02:00 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
nfe thats in RELENG_7 ?
Think so :
OK, and it is the latest RELENG_7 ?
from saturday (but I didn't see any RELENG_7
On 22/04/2008, Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 02:00 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
nfe thats in RELENG_7 ?
Think so :
OK, and it is the latest RELENG_7 ? Or just the if_nfe.c file has been
At 02:35 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Also, you are using ULE or the 4BSD scheduler ? I
still have 4BSD on the box I am testing on.
Interesting, this is with ULE. I didn't really test 4BSD on this
box (I believed those who said SMP needs ULE *and* am quite
satisfied with overall
At 04:13 PM 4/22/2008, pluknet wrote:
Hi, I have the same problem with data corruption (with nfe on nfs
server side),
particularly when transferring large files.
Maybe this is somehow associated with the topic.
My simple test case:
truncate -s 1000m bigfile
^^ here I get zero-filed file
cp
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:13:44AM +0400, pluknet wrote:
On 22/04/2008, Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 02:00 PM 4/22/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Are you using the latest RELENG_7, or at least the latest version of
nfe thats in RELENG_7 ?
Think so :
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 01:02:33AM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
I didn't stress-test this MB for a while, but last time I did was
with 7-PRELEASE/RC?/CANTremember-exactly-but-close-to-release
and all worked great
I did add 2G ECC to the 2nd CPU since, though I doubt that interferes
with
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 01:02:33AM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
I didn't stress-test this MB for a while, but last time I did was
with 7-PRELEASE/RC?/CANTremember-exactly-but-close-to-release
and all worked great
I did add 2G ECC to the 2nd
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:52:55PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, you're getting server-side data corruption, it could definitely be
because of the memory you added.
yop, though I'm still not convinced the memory is bad (the very same
Kingston
At 10:52 AM 4/21/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Device is :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:10:0: class=0x068000 card=0x289510f1
chip=0x005710de rev=0xa3 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'Nvidia Corp'
device = 'nForce4 Ultra NVidia Network Bus Enumerator'
class = bridge
cap 01[44] =
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 08:43:33AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:52:55PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, you're getting server-side data corruption, it could definitely be
because of the memory you added.
yop,
Hello,
Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:52:55PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, you're getting server-side data corruption, it could definitely be
because of the memory you added.
[ .. stuff deleted; I'll
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 06:24:45PM +0200, Erik Trulsson wrote:
As for reliability I see no particular reason for that board to be less
reliable than any other multi-CPU board.
Sorry for my complete and total opinionated noise, then.
--
| Jeremy Chadwickjdc at
yet another quick partial answer :
Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:52:55PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, you're getting server-side data corruption, it could definitely be
because of the memory you
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 08:30:48PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
NB, (CC to kris@ for this) why is memtest86 port marked as i386-only?
Basically because it's a bootable i386 binary image.
(maybe I should leave one box dedicated to freebsd-i386 for things
like this ;) )
No need - just download
re,
Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:52:55PM +0200, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, you're getting server-side data corruption, it could definitely be
because of the memory you added.
yop, though I'm still
Hello,
Mike Tancsa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 10:52 AM 4/21/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Device is :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:0:10:0: class=0x068000 card=0x289510f1
chip=0x005710de rev=0xa3 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'Nvidia Corp'
device = 'nForce4 Ultra NVidia Network
At 05:57 PM 4/21/2008, Arno J. Klaassen wrote:
Less than an hour in general (running the same client script
simultanuously on a 100Mbps linux box and 1Gbps bds6-x86)
Hi,
I ran it for over an hour without cpufreq and powerd without
problems with just one client. I will recompile the
Hello,
I've a strange problem with a box I'm setting up as nfs-server
under 7-stable :
- tyan S2895 MB, 2*285Dualcore Opteron, 4G-ECC, ahd-scsi, nfe-network
- stripped GENERIC as kernel
- sources as of last saturday afternoon (European time)
I removed everything from /boot/loader.conf and
28 matches
Mail list logo
