Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Joerg Wunsch

As Peter Wemm wrote:

 There shouldn't *be* bootblocks on non-boot disks.
 
 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da$n count=1
 
 Dont use disklabel -B -rw da$n auto.  Use disklabel -rw da$n auto.

All my disks have bootblocks and (spare) boot partitions.  All the
bootblocks are DD mode.  I don't see any point in using obsolete fdisk
tables.  (There's IMHO only one purpose obsolete fdisk tables are good
for, co-operation with other operating systems in the same machine.
None of my machines uses anything else than FreeBSD.)

-- 
cheers, Jorg   .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



$B‘t%i%V!&%^%8%D%/s(B

2001-12-09 Thread haisin-010002
$B$"$C$?$+$$29$b$j;}$C$F$^$9$+!)(B
$B4($$?4$rKd$a$F$/$l$k$=$s$J=P2q$$$,$3$3$K$O$"$j$^$9!#(B
$B$?$a$7$K$"$J$?$N5$;}$A$r=q$-9~$s$G$4$i$s(B
$B4j$$$O$+$J$i$:3p$$$^$9$h!*(B
Http://www.if-j.net
$B=P2q$$7O%5%$%H!V%$%U!W$G$9!#(B
$B$"$J$?$KKbK!$r%F%/%^%/%^%d%3%s‘{(B
$B=w@-L5NA$5$i$K%-%c%C%7%g%P%C%/!*(B
$BCK@-$b#3#0%]%$%s%HL5NACf!*(B
$B7HBSEEOC$+$4<+Bp$NEEOCHV9f$GEPO?$7$F$/$@$5$$!#(B
$B%"%I%l%9EyHs8x3+$G$9$N$G0B?4$7$F$4MxMQ$/$@$5$$!#(B


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message


Re: send_packet: No buffer space available

2001-12-09 Thread Walter Belgers

Andrea Campi wrote:
  Well, you're sending out packets faster than your hardware can
  transmit them. 
 So, at least now we know what to answer if the question arises again (I
 has several people who send 'me too' emails to me).

I was having the same problem on my 4.4-RELEASE box. After swapping the
Digital (dc) ethernet card for a 3COM (xl) one (and getting rid of a few
bogus route entries), the messages stopped appearing and the system has
been running fine ever since. I haven't checked if the digital card
works well in another box, so I'm not sure if it's the driver, the card
or the route entries.

Cheers,
Walter.
-- 
Walter Belgers Si hoc signum legere potes, operis boni in rebus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Latinis alacribus et fructuosis potiri potes! 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread sthaug

 All my disks have bootblocks and (spare) boot partitions.  All the
 bootblocks are DD mode.  I don't see any point in using obsolete fdisk
 tables.  (There's IMHO only one purpose obsolete fdisk tables are good
 for, co-operation with other operating systems in the same machine.
 None of my machines uses anything else than FreeBSD.)

There are very good reasons NOT to use DD mode if you use certain types
of Adaptec SCSI controllers - they simply won't boot from DD.

Aside from that, FreeBSD needs to have *one* recommendation for disks,
anything else creates too much confusion. It is certainly my impression
that the recommendation has been NOT using DD for the IA32 architecture
for quite a while now.

(The other day a coworker of mine wanted to use DD for some IBM DTLA
disks, because he'd heard that the disks performed better that way -
something to do with scatter-gather not working right unless you used
DD. I'm highly skeptical about this since I have my own measurements
from IBM DTLA disks partitioned the normal way, ie. NOT DD, and they
show the disks performing extremely well. Anybody else want to comment
on this?)

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Daniel O'Connor


On 09-Dec-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  (The other day a coworker of mine wanted to use DD for some IBM DTLA
  disks, because he'd heard that the disks performed better that way -
  something to do with scatter-gather not working right unless you used
  DD. I'm highly skeptical about this since I have my own measurements
  from IBM DTLA disks partitioned the normal way, ie. NOT DD, and they
  show the disks performing extremely well. Anybody else want to comment
  on this?)

Sounds like an Old Wives Tale to me.

I don't understand the need some people have for using something that is
labelled as DANGEROUS.

No, it won't hurt your cats but you may lose hair from using it, and for what
benefit? NONE!

---
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from.
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Patch to cp to correct PR#27970 and PR#31633, for review

2001-12-09 Thread mckay

Hi!

Normally, I'd just commit this and wait for the flak, but since I'm changing
the default behaviour when copying directories, I thought people might care.

This patch fixes PR#27970 (directory times not preserved with -p) and
PR#31633 (non-empty read-only directories not copied).  It does so by
setting times and permissions on directories in the post-order phase of
the file hierarchy traversal.

Review point 1: there is a minor functional change with this patch:
umask is now applied to copied directories (assuming -p not specified)

$ umask 027
$ mkdir foo
$ chmod 777 foo
$ cp -r foo bar1
$ patchedcp -r foo bar2
$ ls -ld foo bar?
drwxrwxrwx  2 mckay  wheel  512 10 Dec 00:29 foo
drwxrwxrwx  2 mckay  wheel  512 10 Dec 00:29 bar1
drwxr-x---  2 mckay  wheel  512 10 Dec 00:29 bar2
$

I believe the new behaviour is correct.  It follows SUSv2, and matches
GNU cp.  I know of nothing that will fail with this change.

Review point 2: in order to avoid a chmod() per directory in the normal
case, there is a complicated conditional to set curr-fts_number.  If
I changed this to simply:

curr-fts_number = dne;

then readability and testability would be enhanced, at the cost of a
couple of unnecessary chmod() system calls.  I'm leaning towards ditching
the conditional.  Anybody against?

I'll commit this is a day or two, unless there are any problems.  Also,
there are a number of other open PRs against cp which I hope to commit
fixes for.  In particular PR#17389 should be fixed.  Oh, and the typo
fix to util.c is sort of a freebie. :-)

Stephen.

PS Some people use -audit for code reviews.  But the charter claims it
is for security auditing.  Which is right?


Index: cp.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/cp/cp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -r1.27 cp.c
--- cp.c2001/06/19 15:41:54 1.27
+++ cp.c2001/12/09 14:50:39
@@ -248,7 +248,15 @@
FTSENT *curr;
int base = 0, dne, badcp, nlen, rval;
char *p, *target_mid;
+   mode_t mask;
 
+   /*
+* Keep an inverted copy of the umask, for use in correcting
+* permissions on created directories when not using -p.
+*/
+   mask = ~umask(0777);
+   umask(~mask);
+
if ((ftsp = fts_open(argv, fts_options, mastercmp)) == NULL)
err(1, NULL);
for (badcp = rval = 0; (curr = fts_read(ftsp)) != NULL; badcp = 0) {
@@ -264,8 +272,6 @@
warnx(%s: directory causes a cycle, curr-fts_path);
badcp = rval = 1;
continue;
-   case FTS_DP:/* Ignore, continue. */
-   continue;
}
 
/*
@@ -323,6 +329,25 @@
STRIP_TRAILING_SLASH(to);
}
 
+   if (curr-fts_info == FTS_DP) {
+   /*
+* We are finished copying to this directory.  If
+* -p is in effect, set permissions and timestamps.
+* Otherwise, if we created this directory, set the
+* correct permissions, limited by the umask.
+*/
+   if (pflag)
+   rval = setfile(curr-fts_statp, 0);
+   else if (curr-fts_number) {
+   mode_t perm = curr-fts_statp-st_mode  mask;
+   if (chmod(to.p_path, perm)) {
+   warn(chmod: %s, to.p_path);
+   rval = 1;
+   }
+   }
+   continue;
+   }
+
/* Not an error but need to remember it happened */
if (stat(to.p_path, to_stat) == -1)
dne = 1;
@@ -376,16 +401,19 @@
err(1, %s, to.p_path);
}
/*
-* If not -p and directory didn't exist, set it to be
-* the same as the from directory, umodified by the
- * umask; arguably wrong, but it's been that way
- * forever.
+* Arrange to correct directory permissions later
+* (in the post-order phase) if this is a new
+* directory and the permissions aren't the final
+* ones we want yet.  Note that mkdir() does not
+* honour setuid, setgid nor sticky bits, but we
+* normally want to preserve them on directories.
 */
-   if (pflag  setfile(curr-fts_statp, 0))
-   badcp = rval = 1;
-   else if (dne)
-   

Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Joerg Wunsch

As Daniel O'Connor wrote:

 I don't understand the need some people have for using something
 that is labelled as DANGEROUS.

Historically, it hasn't been labelled that, it only later became
common terminology for it -- in the typical half-joking manner.

 No, it won't hurt your cats but you may lose hair from using it, and
 for what benefit? NONE!

See my other reply about fdisk tables: they are a misdesign from the
beginning.

The single most wanted feature it buys you is the ability to
completely forget the term `geometry' with your disks: the very first
sectors of a disk always have the same BIOS int 0x13 representation,
regardless of what your BIOS/controller thinks the `geometry' might
be.  Thus, those disks are basically portable between controller
BIOSes.  (Modulo those newer broken BIOSes that believe eggs must be
smarter than hens -- see my other article for an opinion.)

-- 
cheers, Jorg   .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Joerg Wunsch

As [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 There are very good reasons NOT to use DD mode if you use certain
 types of Adaptec SCSI controllers - they simply won't boot from DD.

Never seen.  All my SCSI controllers so far booted from my disks
(obviously :).

I figure from Peter's comment in that piece of code that the original
(386BSD 0.0 inherited) DD mode fake fdisk table apparently had some
poor (faked) values inside that could upset some BIOSes.  That's bad,
and IMHO we should fix what could be fixed, but without dropping that
feature entirely (see below).

personal opinion
Still, it's my opinion that these BIOSes are simply broken:
interpretation of the fdisk table has always been in the realm of the
boot block itself.  The BIOS should decide whether a disk is bootable
or not by looking at the 0x55aa signature at the end, nothing else.
Think of the old OnTrack Disk Manager that extended the fdisk table to
16 slots -- nothing the BIOS could ever even handle.  It was in the
realm of the boot block to interpret it.
/personal opinion

 Aside from that, FreeBSD needs to have *one* recommendation for
 disks, anything else creates too much confusion.

DD mode has never been a recommendation.  It is for those who know
what it means.  I'm only against the idea to silently drop support for
it...  fdisk tables are something that has been designed in the
previous millenium, and i think nobody is going to argue about it that
they are rather a mis-design from the beginning (or even no design at
all, but an ad-hoc implementation).  Two different values for the same
(which could become conflicting, thus making disks unportable between
different controllers), not enough value space to even remotely cover
the disks of our millenium, enforcement of something they call
`geometry' which isn't even remotely related to the disks' geometry
anymore at all, far too few possible entries anyway, ...  FreeBSD is
in a position where it doesn't strictly require the existence of such
an obsoleted implementation detail, so we should users leave the
freedom of decision.

Again, it has never been the recommendation (well, at least not after
386BSD 0.0 :), and i normally wouldn't recommend it to the innocent
user.  But we should not break it either.

 (The other day a coworker of mine wanted to use DD for some IBM DTLA
 disks, because he'd heard that the disks performed better that way -
 something to do with scatter-gather not working right unless you
 used DD. [...])

As much as i personally prefer DD mode: that's an urban legend.

-- 
cheers, Jorg   .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Mike Smith

 As Peter Wemm wrote:
 
  There shouldn't *be* bootblocks on non-boot disks.
  
  dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da$n count=1
  
  Dont use disklabel -B -rw da$n auto.  Use disklabel -rw da$n auto.
 
 All my disks have bootblocks and (spare) boot partitions.  All the
 bootblocks are DD mode.  I don't see any point in using obsolete fdisk
 tables.  (There's IMHO only one purpose obsolete fdisk tables are good
 for, co-operation with other operating systems in the same machine.
 None of my machines uses anything else than FreeBSD.)

Since I tire of seeing people hit this ignorant opinion in the list 
archives, I'll just offer the rational counterpoints.

 - The MBR partition table is not obsolete, it's a part of the PC 
   architecture specification.
 - You omit the fact that many peripheral device vendors' BIOS code looks 
   for the MBR partition table, and will fail if it's not present or 
   incorrect.

You do realise that DD mode does include a (invalid) MBR partition 
table (now valid, courtesy of a long-needed fix), right?

I'd love to never hear those invalid, unuseful, misleading opinions from 
you again.


-- 
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also.  But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view.  [Dr. Fritz Todt]
   V I C T O R Y   N O T   V E N G E A N C E



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Mike Smith

 (The other day a coworker of mine wanted to use DD for some IBM DTLA
 disks, because he'd heard that the disks performed better that way -
 something to do with scatter-gather not working right unless you used
 DD. I'm highly skeptical about this since I have my own measurements
 from IBM DTLA disks partitioned the normal way, ie. NOT DD, and they
 show the disks performing extremely well. Anybody else want to comment
 on this?)

Since scatter-gather has nothing to do with the disk (it's a feature of 
the disk controller's interface to host memory), I think this coworker of 
yours is delusional.

-- 
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also.  But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view.  [Dr. Fritz Todt]
   V I C T O R Y   N O T   V E N G E A N C E



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Question about Freebsd driver

2001-12-09 Thread Mike Smith


 I have a question about Freebsd driver. If we want to support some
 options in driver(like speed and duplex mode setting) , user can use this
 option to change driver configurations. I am not sure whether freebsd
 driver support driver parameter or something else. Can you give me some
 suggestions? Thanks!!

From the question, I infer that you are referring to Ethernet device 
drivers.  In the FreeBSD model, devices fit into one or more of a set of 
classes.  Each class has an established, device-independant mechanism for 
controlling driver parameters.  In the case of Ethernet drivers, 
parameters are controlled via the driver's ioctl interface.

You should be able to find good examples of this in the source for other 
drivers similar to your own.  If you have more specific questions, please 
feel free to ask them here.

Regards,
Mike



-- 
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also.  But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view.  [Dr. Fritz Todt]
   V I C T O R Y   N O T   V E N G E A N C E



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Joerg Wunsch

Mike Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  - The MBR partition table is not obsolete, it's a part of the PC 
architecture specification.

Its design is antique.  Or rather: it's missing a design.  See other
mail for the reasons.  For FreeBSD, it's obsolete since we don't need
to rely on fdisk slices.  (Or rather: it's optional.  We can make good
use of it when it's there, but we don't need to insist on it being
there.)

 You do realise that DD mode does include a (invalid) MBR partition
 table (now valid, courtesy of a long-needed fix), right?

Yes, of course, one that is basically ignored by everything.  It has
always been there, back since 386BSD 0.1.  386BSD 0.0 didn't recognize
fdisk tables at all, but could only live on a disk by its own (as any
other BSD before used to).

 I'd love to never hear those invalid, unuseful, misleading opinions
 from you again.

ETOOMANYATTRIBUTES? :-)

As long as you keep the feature of DD mode intact, i won't argue.  If
people feel like creating disks that aren't portable to another
controller, they should do.  I don't like this idea.

But to be honest, see my other article: i never argued to make this
the default or a recommended strategy in any form.  It should only
remain intact at all.  Back to the subject, the current warning
however, is pointless, and has the major drawback to potentially hide
important console messages.

-- 
cheers, Jorg   .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



*HEADS UP!* This means you!

2001-12-09 Thread Mark Murray

Hi

Now that I have your attention, please listen up, this may have some
far-reaching consequences.

We currently have 2 telnet sources in the src/ tree; src/crypto/telnet
and the base telnet spread around in (src/*/*telnet*/).

The base telnet is a complete subset of src/crypto telnet, and as
a consequence of this, I want to remove the base telnet bits from
the src/ tree. (Just the source, not the build infrastructure).

This will be accomplished by removing the base sources, and building
telnet without defining the AUTHENTICATION and ENCRYPTION macros. These
macros are currently used with unifdef to make (by hand) the base
telnet stuff).

I'm not sure when I'll make the commit, but it will be soonish, with
due fanfare.

Those of you who believe that you may be in trouble with your
government by having crypto in your posession (as opposed to using
it), please let me know ASAP! This will make src/crypto mandatory
if you want telnet(d). This will _not_ make crypto _use_ mandatory.

M
-- 
o   Mark Murray
\_  FreeBSD Services Limited
O.\_Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Greg Lehey

On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 22:52:58 +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote:

 On 09-Dec-2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  (The other day a coworker of mine wanted to use DD for some IBM DTLA
  disks, because he'd heard that the disks performed better that way -
  something to do with scatter-gather not working right unless you used
  DD. I'm highly skeptical about this since I have my own measurements
  from IBM DTLA disks partitioned the normal way, ie. NOT DD, and they
  show the disks performing extremely well. Anybody else want to comment
  on this?)

 Sounds like an Old Wives Tale to me.

 I don't understand the need some people have for using something that is
 labelled as DANGEROUS.

I don't understand the need some people have for labelling something
as DANGEROUS when it works nearly all the time.

We don't have many disks which are shared between different platforms,
but that will change.  As you know, I have the ability to hot swap
disks between an RS/6000 platform and an ia32 platform.  The RS/6000
disks will never have a Microsoft partition table on them.  They will
have BSD partition tables on them.  Why call this dangerous?

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Dangerously Decidated yet again (was : cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Greg Lehey

On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 12:15:19 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
 As Peter Wemm wrote:

 There shouldn't *be* bootblocks on non-boot disks.

 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da$n count=1

 Dont use disklabel -B -rw da$n auto.  Use disklabel -rw da$n auto.

 All my disks have bootblocks and (spare) boot partitions.  All the
 bootblocks are DD mode.  I don't see any point in using obsolete fdisk
 tables.  (There's IMHO only one purpose obsolete fdisk tables are good
 for, co-operation with other operating systems in the same machine.
 None of my machines uses anything else than FreeBSD.)

 Since I tire of seeing people hit this ignorant opinion in the list
 archives, I'll just offer the rational counterpoints.

  - The MBR partition table is not obsolete, it's a part of the PC
architecture specification.

And if it's part of the PC architecture specification, it can't be
obsolete?  I dont see any contradiction here.

  - You omit the fact that many peripheral device vendors' BIOS code looks
for the MBR partition table, and will fail if it's not present or
incorrect.

What do you mean by peripheral device?  I've never heard of disk
drives having a BIOS.  If you're talking about host adaptors, it's you
who omit what Jörg says about it:

No, on the contrary, he went into some detail on this point:

On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 19:46:06 +0100, Joerg Wunsch wrote:

 personal opinion
 Still, it's my opinion that these BIOSes are simply broken:
 interpretation of the fdisk table has always been in the realm of the
 boot block itself.  The BIOS should decide whether a disk is bootable
 or not by looking at the 0x55aa signature at the end, nothing else.
 Think of the old OnTrack Disk Manager that extended the fdisk table to
 16 slots -- nothing the BIOS could ever even handle.  It was in the
 realm of the boot block to interpret it.
 /personal opinion

I agree with Jörg on this.

 I'd love to never hear those invalid, unuseful, misleading opinions
 from you again.

I'd love to never have to see this level of invective poured onto what
was previously a calm discussion.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: wi driver: firmware %i.%i problem?

2001-12-09 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alan Edmonds writes:
: I'm not sure if the %i is a problem the kernel printf or

I didn't checkin the small patch to the kernel printf for %i support
yet.  Ignore it for now.

Warner

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Peter Wemm

Joerg Wunsch wrote:
 As Peter Wemm wrote:
 
  There shouldn't *be* bootblocks on non-boot disks.
  
  dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da$n count=1
  
  Dont use disklabel -B -rw da$n auto.  Use disklabel -rw da$n auto.
 
 All my disks have bootblocks and (spare) boot partitions.  All the
 bootblocks are DD mode.  I don't see any point in using obsolete fdisk
 tables.  (There's IMHO only one purpose obsolete fdisk tables are good
 for, co-operation with other operating systems in the same machine.
 None of my machines uses anything else than FreeBSD.)

The problem is, that you **are** using fdisk tables, you have no choice.
DD mode included a *broken* fdisk table that specified an illegal geometry.

This illegal geometry was the reason why Thinkpad Laptops would wedge solid
when you installed FreeBSD on it.

This illegal geometry is the reason why FreeBSD disks wedge solid any EFI
system unless you remove the illegal geometry tables.

This illegal geometry causes divide by zero errors in a handful of scsi
bioses from Adaptec.

This illegal geometry causes divide by zero errors in a handful of scsi
bioses from NCR/Symbios.

This is why it is called dangerous.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Matthew Dillon


:This illegal geometry causes divide by zero errors in a handful of scsi
:bioses from Adaptec.
:
:This illegal geometry causes divide by zero errors in a handful of scsi
:bioses from NCR/Symbios.
:
:This is why it is called dangerous.
:
:Cheers,
:-Peter
:--
:Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Handful?  I'm taking my life in my hands if I DD a DELL machine.  BEWM!
As I found out the hard way about a year ago.  (Probably the Adaptec 
firmware but every Dell rack-mount has one so...).  The machines wouldn't
boot again until I pulled the physical drives and then camcontrol 
rescan'd them in after a CD boot.  Joy.

This is why I fixed disklabel -B to operate properly on slices and 
added a whole section to the end of 'man disklabel' to describe how
to do it.

-Matt


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Peter Wemm

Joerg Wunsch wrote:
 Mike Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   - The MBR partition table is not obsolete, it's a part of the PC 
 architecture specification.
 
 Its design is antique.  Or rather: it's missing a design.  See other
 mail for the reasons.  For FreeBSD, it's obsolete since we don't need
 to rely on fdisk slices.  (Or rather: it's optional.  We can make good
 use of it when it's there, but we don't need to insist on it being
 there.)

No, it isn't.  We specifically have a copy of both the broken and fixed
fdisk tables in the kernel and do a bcmp() to see if the fdisk table that
is included in /boot/boot1 **uncoditionally** is in fact the dangerously
dedicated table.  If it is, then we specifically reject it or we end up
with a disk size of 25MB (5 sectors).

  You do realise that DD mode does include a (invalid) MBR partition
  table (now valid, courtesy of a long-needed fix), right?
 
 Yes, of course, one that is basically ignored by everything.  It has
 always been there, back since 386BSD 0.1.  386BSD 0.0 didn't recognize
 fdisk tables at all, but could only live on a disk by its own (as any
 other BSD before used to).

No, it isn't ignored,  BIOS'es know that fdisk partitions end on cylinder
boundaries, and therefore can intuit what the expected geometry is for
the disk in question.  It does this in order to allow the CHS int 0x13
calls to work.  The problem is that the int13 code only allowed for 255 heads,
and the fake end of disk entry that is unconditionally in /boot/boot1
specified an ending head number 255 (ie: 256 heads).  When this gets put
into a byte register it is truncated to zero and we get divide by zero
errors.

  I'd love to never hear those invalid, unuseful, misleading opinions
  from you again.
 
 ETOOMANYATTRIBUTES? :-)
 
 As long as you keep the feature of DD mode intact, i won't argue.  If
 people feel like creating disks that aren't portable to another
 controller, they should do.  I don't like this idea.

We can just as easily have bootable-DD mode with a real MBR and have
freebsd start on sector #2 instead of overlapping boot1 and mbr.   This
costs only one sector instead of 64 sectors (a whopping 32K, I'm sure that
is going to break the bank on today's disks).

I'd rather that we be specific about this.  If somebody wants ad2e or da2e
then they should not be using *any* fdisk tables at all.  Ie: block 0
should be empty.  The problem is that if you put /boot/boot1 in there, then
suddenly it looks like a fdisk disk and we have to have ugly magic to
detect it and prevent the fake table from being used.  I would prefer that
the fdisk table come out of /boot/boot1 so that we dont have to have it by
default, and we use fdisk to install the DD magic table if somebody wants
to make it bootable.

 But to be honest, see my other article: i never argued to make this
 the default or a recommended strategy in any form.  It should only
 remain intact at all.  Back to the subject, the current warning
 however, is pointless, and has the major drawback to potentially hide
 important console messages.

The console buffer is 32K these days.  You'd have to have around 300
disks to have any real effect on the kernel.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: *HEADS UP!* This means you!

2001-12-09 Thread Peter Wemm

Mark Murray wrote:
 Hi
 
 Now that I have your attention, please listen up, this may have some
 far-reaching consequences.
 
 We currently have 2 telnet sources in the src/ tree; src/crypto/telnet
 and the base telnet spread around in (src/*/*telnet*/).
 
 The base telnet is a complete subset of src/crypto telnet, and as
 a consequence of this, I want to remove the base telnet bits from
 the src/ tree. (Just the source, not the build infrastructure).
 
 This will be accomplished by removing the base sources, and building
 telnet without defining the AUTHENTICATION and ENCRYPTION macros. These
 macros are currently used with unifdef to make (by hand) the base
 telnet stuff).
 
 I'm not sure when I'll make the commit, but it will be soonish, with
 due fanfare.
 
 Those of you who believe that you may be in trouble with your
 government by having crypto in your posession (as opposed to using
 it), please let me know ASAP! This will make src/crypto mandatory
 if you want telnet(d). This will _not_ make crypto _use_ mandatory.

I for one will miss it.  I used libexec/telnetd extensively during ia64
bootstrap (and still use it) before we had the crypto stuff going.  This
was all built by hand, 'make world' still isn't an option there.  I also
use usr.bin/telnet on other systems where SRA is constantly getting in 
my face and annoying the !^@#%!@^#!# out of me.

I really dont see that this has to be done this way.  FreeBSD committers
catch on to quirks in the tree pretty quickly.  I would much rather that
the unifdef step marked the generated files more prominantly so that we
didn't have accidents.  It would be a shame to complicate things when it
just takes a bit of committer education.

How about making the unifdef: targets whack on large BEWARE! GENERATED
FILE! warnings all over the beginning and end of each of them instead?

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously Decidated yet again (was : cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Mike Smith

 On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 19:46:06 +0100, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
 
  personal opinion
  Still, it's my opinion that these BIOSes are simply broken:

Joerg's personal opinion can go take a hike.  The reality of the 
situation is that this table is required, and we're going to put it there.

End of story.

-- 
... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his
rivals and unfortunately opponents also.  But not because people want
to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force
people to take different points of view.  [Dr. Fritz Todt]
   V I C T O R Y   N O T   V E N G E A N C E



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously Decidated yet again (was : cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Greg Lehey

On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 18:32:38 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
 On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 19:46:06 +0100, Joerg Wunsch wrote:

 personal opinion
 Still, it's my opinion that these BIOSes are simply broken:

 Joerg's personal opinion can go take a hike.  The reality of the
 situation is that this table is required, and we're going to put it there.

The reality of the situation is far from being clear.  The only thing
I can see is that you're trying to dictate things without adequate
justification.  You should reconsider that attitude.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Terry Lambert

Greg Lehey wrote:

[ ... IBM DTLA drives ... ]

IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.

This is not often a problem with windows, the FS of shich fills
sectors in towards the spindle, so you only hit the problem when
you near the disk full state.

Do a Google/Tom's Hardware search to reassure yourself that I am
not smoking anything.

  I don't understand the need some people have for using something that is
  labelled as DANGEROUS.
 
 I don't understand the need some people have for labelling something
 as DANGEROUS when it works nearly all the time.

It's because you have to reinstall, should you want to add a second
OS at a later date (e.g. Linux, or Windows).

 We don't have many disks which are shared between different platforms,
 but that will change.  As you know, I have the ability to hot swap
 disks between an RS/6000 platform and an ia32 platform.  The RS/6000
 disks will never have a Microsoft partition table on them.  They will
 have BSD partition tables on them.  Why call this dangerous?

Your use is orthogonal to the most common expected usage, which is
disks shared between OSs on a single platform, rather than disks
shared between a single OS on multiple platforms.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread Terry Lambert

 Joerg Wunsch wrote:
  Mike Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- The MBR partition table is not obsolete, it's a part of the PC
  architecture specification.
 
  Its design is antique.  Or rather: it's missing a design.  See other
  mail for the reasons.  For FreeBSD, it's obsolete since we don't need
  to rely on fdisk slices.  (Or rather: it's optional.  We can make good
  use of it when it's there, but we don't need to insist on it being
  there.)

FWIW: The MBR layout is documented in great gory detail in chapter 6
of the PReP specififcation, which I believe is now available on line
from the PowerPC folks, Apple, and Motorolla, and also as an IBM
redbook.  It discusses everything, including the LBA fields, and
sharing disks between PPC (running in Motorolla byte order) and x86
machines (running a DOS-derived OS).

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: *HEADS UP!* This means you!

2001-12-09 Thread Daniel Eischen

On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Peter Wemm wrote:
 Mark Murray wrote:
  Hi
  
  Now that I have your attention, please listen up, this may have some
  far-reaching consequences.
  
  We currently have 2 telnet sources in the src/ tree; src/crypto/telnet
  and the base telnet spread around in (src/*/*telnet*/).
  
  The base telnet is a complete subset of src/crypto telnet, and as
  a consequence of this, I want to remove the base telnet bits from
  the src/ tree. (Just the source, not the build infrastructure).
  
  This will be accomplished by removing the base sources, and building
  telnet without defining the AUTHENTICATION and ENCRYPTION macros. These
  macros are currently used with unifdef to make (by hand) the base
  telnet stuff).
  
  I'm not sure when I'll make the commit, but it will be soonish, with
  due fanfare.
  
  Those of you who believe that you may be in trouble with your
  government by having crypto in your posession (as opposed to using
  it), please let me know ASAP! This will make src/crypto mandatory
  if you want telnet(d). This will _not_ make crypto _use_ mandatory.
 
 I for one will miss it.  I used libexec/telnetd extensively during ia64
 bootstrap (and still use it) before we had the crypto stuff going.  This
 was all built by hand, 'make world' still isn't an option there.  I also
 use usr.bin/telnet on other systems where SRA is constantly getting in 
 my face and annoying the !^@#%!@^#!# out of me.

I agree.  SRA is really annoying.

-- 
Dan Eischen

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: *HEADS UP!* This means you!

2001-12-09 Thread Doug Ambrisko

Peter Wemm writes:
| I for one will miss it.  I used libexec/telnetd extensively during ia64
| bootstrap (and still use it) before we had the crypto stuff going.  This
| was all built by hand, 'make world' still isn't an option there.  I also
| use usr.bin/telnet on other systems where SRA is constantly getting in 
| my face and annoying the !^@#%!@^#!# out of me.

Well, for the SRA thing you can do a -X SRA now that it doesn't 
core-dump if you do that (I submited that patch a year ago or so
since it was pretty annoying!).  I setup my telnetd servers with 
-X SRA so that I don't have to do it via command line.

Doug A.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Greg Lehey

On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 18:46:24 -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
 Greg Lehey wrote:

 [ ... IBM DTLA drives ... ]

No, that wasn't me.

 IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
 that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
 electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.

What about the cache?

 This is not often a problem with windows, the FS of shich fills
 sectors in towards the spindle, so you only hit the problem when you
 near the disk full state.

This sounds very unlikely.

 Do a Google/Tom's Hardware search to reassure yourself that I am not
 smoking anything.

I think I'd rather put the shoe on the other foot.  This looks like
high-grade crack.  Who was smoking it?

 I don't understand the need some people have for using something that is
 labelled as DANGEROUS.

 I don't understand the need some people have for labelling something
 as DANGEROUS when it works nearly all the time.

I *did* write this.

 It's because you have to reinstall, should you want to add a second
 OS at a later date (e.g. Linux, or Windows).

So all dedicated installations are dangerous?   I would have to do
that whether I had a Microsoft partition table or not if I had already
used the entire disk for FreeBSD.

 We don't have many disks which are shared between different platforms,
 but that will change.  As you know, I have the ability to hot swap
 disks between an RS/6000 platform and an ia32 platform.  The RS/6000
 disks will never have a Microsoft partition table on them.  They will
 have BSD partition tables on them.  Why call this dangerous?

 Your use is orthogonal to the most common expected usage, which is
 disks shared between OSs on a single platform, rather than disks
 shared between a single OS on multiple platforms.

Expected usage is to install once and then never change it.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Terry Lambert

Greg Lehey wrote:
  [ ... IBM DTLA drives ... ]
 
 No, that wasn't me.

I didn't quote the full thing; that's what the brackets and ellipsis
was for.


  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
 
 What about the cache?

Good point.  The cache is known to not actually flush to disk when
ordered to do so.  See the EXT3FS article on www.ibm.com/developerworks
for more details.


  This is not often a problem with windows, the FS of shich fills
  sectors in towards the spindle, so you only hit the problem when you
  near the disk full state.
 
 This sounds very unlikely.

I know, doesn't it?  Good thing Tom's Hardware is so thorough, or we
might never have known this, with everyone on the verge of discovering
it simply dismissing it as very unlikely.  8^).

  Do a Google/Tom's Hardware search to reassure yourself that I am not
  smoking anything.
 
 I think I'd rather put the shoe on the other foot.  This looks like
 high-grade crack.  Who was smoking it?

Tom's Hardware, IBM, CNET, Storave Review, etc..

http://www6.tomshardware.com/storage/00q3/000821/ibmdtla-07.html
http://www.storage.ibm.com/hdd/prod/deskstar.htm
http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-1092-418-1664463.html?pn=3lb=2ob=0tag=st\.co.1092.bottom.1664463-3
http://www.storagereview.com/welcome.pl?/http://www.storagereview.com/jive/sr/thread.jsp?forum=2thread=12485

I suggest the search:

http://google.yahoo.com/bin/query?p=DTLA+drive+problemhc=0hs=0


  It's because you have to reinstall, should you want to add a second
  OS at a later date (e.g. Linux, or Windows).
 
 So all dedicated installations are dangerous?   I would have to do
 that whether I had a Microsoft partition table or not if I had already
 used the entire disk for FreeBSD.

Yes.  I don't understand your point.


  Your use is orthogonal to the most common expected usage, which is
  disks shared between OSs on a single platform, rather than disks
  shared between a single OS on multiple platforms.
 
 Expected usage is to install once and then never change it.

No, expected usage is to purchase a machine with an OS preinstalled,
and then install FreeBSD/Linux/BeOS/other third party OS as an also
ran, rather than the primary OS.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Terry Lambert

Greg Lehey wrote:
[ ... DTLA drives ... ]

  Do a Google/Tom's Hardware search to reassure yourself that I am not
  smoking anything.
 
 I think I'd rather put the shoe on the other foot.  This looks like
 high-grade crack.  Who was smoking it?


For your further amusement, here is a pointer to the class action
lawsuit against IBM on the 75GXP DTLA drives:

http://www.tech-report.com/news_reply.x/3035/3/

It includes a pointer to the PDF of the complaint form.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Matthew Dillon

On google search for:

deskstar 75gxp class action

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/22412.html
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,67608,00.asp

etc...  So apparently my warning about these drives in 'man tuning' is
still appropriate :-)

-Matt

:  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
:  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
:  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
: 
: What about the cache?
:
:Good point.  The cache is known to not actually flush to disk when
:ordered to do so.  See the EXT3FS article on www.ibm.com/developerworks
:for more details.
:
:  This is not often a problem with windows, the FS of shich fills
:  sectors in towards the spindle, so you only hit the problem when you
:  near the disk full state.
: 
: This sounds very unlikely.
:
:I know, doesn't it?  Good thing Tom's Hardware is so thorough, or we
:might never have known this, with everyone on the verge of discovering
:it simply dismissing it as very unlikely.  8^).
:...


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kernsubr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Julian Elischer



On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Matthew Dillon wrote:

 On google search for:
 
   deskstar 75gxp class action
 
 http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/22412.html
 http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,67608,00.asp
 
 etc...  So apparently my warning about these drives in 'man tuning' is
 still appropriate :-)
 
   -Matt
 
 :  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
 :  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
 :  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.


I would adssume it actually the tracks FURTHEREST from the spindle..




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c

2001-12-09 Thread David O'Brien

On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 11:00:19PM +0100, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
 Mike Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   - The MBR partition table is not obsolete, it's a part of the PC 
 architecture specification.
 
 Its design is antique.  Or rather: it's missing a design.  See other
 mail for the reasons.  For FreeBSD, it's obsolete since we don't need
 to rely on fdisk slices.  (Or rather: it's optional.  We can make good
 use of it when it's there, but we don't need to insist on it being
 there.)

Jorg, why not just buy an Alpha or Sun Blade and run FreeBSD on it??
You will get the traditional Unix workstation partitioning you so much
long for.  It really seems your arguments are nothing more than MBR's
are a M$ and IBM PeeCee thing, and I hate anything PeeCee.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kernsubr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Matthew Dillon

: etc...  So apparently my warning about these drives in 'man tuning' is
: still appropriate :-)
: 
:  -Matt
: 
: :  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
: :  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
: :  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
:
:
:I would adssume it actually the tracks FURTHEREST from the spindle..

This is the first I've heard of the alleged controller electronics
performance problem.  My understanding is that the failures are due 
to manufacturing problems, but people have apparently experienced
software lockups as well.

What is not in doubt is that there have been some severe problems with
this model.

-Matt


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



IBM DTLA drives (was: Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c) )

2001-12-09 Thread Peter Wemm

Matthew Dillon wrote:
 : etc...  So apparently my warning about these drives in 'man tuning' is
 : still appropriate :-)
 : 
 :-Matt
 : 
 : :  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
 : :  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
 : :  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
 :
 :
 :I would adssume it actually the tracks FURTHEREST from the spindle..
 
 This is the first I've heard of the alleged controller electronics
 performance problem.  My understanding is that the failures are due 
 to manufacturing problems, but people have apparently experienced
 software lockups as well.
 
 What is not in doubt is that there have been some severe problems with
 this model.

Yes there are two problems.  The physical failure problem seems to
be mostly restricted to the 75GXP.  However the electronics/bandwidth/
density/whatever-it-is problem is uniform across the entire DTLA line.
We stopped using 75GXP's at work a while back, but we still regularly
suffer from the electronics/bandwidth/whatever-it-is problem on 30G DTLA
drives on a daily basis.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: IBM DTLA drives (was: Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was:cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c) )

2001-12-09 Thread Søren Schmidt

It seems Peter Wemm wrote:
 
 Yes there are two problems.  The physical failure problem seems to
 be mostly restricted to the 75GXP.  However the electronics/bandwidth/
 density/whatever-it-is problem is uniform across the entire DTLA line.
 We stopped using 75GXP's at work a while back, but we still regularly
 suffer from the electronics/bandwidth/whatever-it-is problem on 30G DTLA
 drives on a daily basis.

It seems this problem only affects the newer versions of the DTLA,
the first models (of which type most of mine are) doesn't seem to
suffer from this problem. The first models looks like the older
DPTA drives, whereas the newer ones has at least a different top cover.

Anyhow, the problem seem to be an electronics malfunction (IBM
doesn't tell exactly) and it is triggered by the drive being
very sensitive to the power supply being top quality.

At any rate I think the hysteria about these drives is somewhat
overrated, but thats only my oppinion...

-Søren

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Six-figure income from home, guaranteed!

2001-12-09 Thread

Below is the result of your feedback form.  It was submitted by
 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on Sunday, December 9, 2001 at 14:13:28
---

To whom it may concern: Are you looking to make money online? 
If you're either looking for a job, tired of your existing job, eager for more pay, or 
just anxious to have the added freedom and independence that comes with working at 
home, this email could change your life.
We can teach you (in under a half-hour) how to pull in a six-figure income from 
home... GUARANTEED, or your money back. 
Click below for more info 
http://www.instantempires.net/money2/

---


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread David W. Chapman Jr.

On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 06:46:24PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
 It's because you have to reinstall, should you want to add a second
 OS at a later date (e.g. Linux, or Windows).

I think it has more to do with the drive going on a new motherboard 
that might not boot with dangerously dedicated than the above.

-- 
David W. Chapman Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Raintree Network Services, Inc. www.inethouston.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   FreeBSD Committer www.FreeBSD.org

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Terry Lambert

David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
 On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 06:46:24PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
  It's because you have to reinstall, should you want to add a second
  OS at a later date (e.g. Linux, or Windows).
 
 I think it has more to do with the drive going on a new motherboard
 that might not boot with dangerously dedicated than the above.

The concept of dangerously dedicated significantly predates BIOS
being unable to boot such drives, either because of antivirus
checks, or because of automatic fictitious geometry determination
by Adaptec or NCR (now Symbios) controllers, which end up getting
divide by zero errors when parsing the fictitious partition
table that the FreeBSD dangerously dedicate mode includes in its
boot block.

In fact, I remember installing 386BSD dangerously dedicated on
an ATT WGS 386 ESDI drive, back in 1992.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread David W. Chapman Jr.

  :  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
  :  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
  :  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
 
 
 I would adssume it actually the tracks FURTHEREST from the spindle..


Wouldn't the linear speed be faster closer to the spindle at 7200 RPM 
than at the edge?


-- 
David W. Chapman Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   Raintree Network Services, Inc. www.inethouston.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   FreeBSD Committer www.FreeBSD.org

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Peter Wemm

David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
   :  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
   :  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
   :  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
  
  
  I would adssume it actually the tracks FURTHEREST from the spindle..
 
 Wouldn't the linear speed be faster closer to the spindle at 7200 RPM 
 than at the edge?

This particular tangent of the disk partitioning thread has gone *way*
off topic. :-)

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Peter Wemm

David W. Chapman Jr. wrote:
 On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 06:46:24PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
  It's because you have to reinstall, should you want to add a second
  OS at a later date (e.g. Linux, or Windows).
 
 I think it has more to do with the drive going on a new motherboard 
 that might not boot with dangerously dedicated than the above.

.. And the mere presence of one of the disks that causes the bios
to lock up at boot.  Note that this is a particularly bad thing in
laptops.

There are three classes of behavior:
1) You luck out and it works
2) You get a bios divide-by-zero fault when you *boot* of the disk. This
   shows up as a 'BTX fault'.  If you check the lists, a good number of
   btx faults posted to the lists have int=0 (divide by zero) in them.
   The problem is more widespread than it appears.
3) You get a system lockup when booting the *computer* if *any* DD disk
   is attached anywhere at all.  This is what killed the Thinkpad T20*,
   A20*, 600X etc.  After all the yelling we did at IBM, it turned out
   to be FreeBSD's fault.  It also happens on Dell systems.  It kills
   all IA64 boxes if a FreeBSD/i386 disk is attached anywhere.

An additional problem is that because boot1 has got a fdisk table
embedded in it unconditionally, a freebsd partition *looks* like it has
got a recursive MBR in it.  This is what is really bad and is what is
killing us on newer systems.  What really sucks is that there is 
**NO WAY** to remove it with the tools that we have except a hex editor.

Cheers,
-Peter
--
Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars - JMS/B5


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Andrew Kenneth Milton

+---[ David W. Chapman Jr. ]--
|   :  IBM DTLA drives are known to rotate fast enough near the spindle
|   :  that the sustained write speed exceeds the ability of the controller
|   :  electronics to keep up, and results in crap being written to disk.
|  
|  
|  I would adssume it actually the tracks FURTHEREST from the spindle..
| 
| 
| Wouldn't the linear speed be faster closer to the spindle at 7200 RPM 
| than at the edge?

er no.

The circumference of a circle is 2 PI r.

So as your distance from the spindle increases the amount of physical real estate
you're traversing increases. Since you are turning at a constant angular velocity, 
your linear velocity increases as the distance from the spindle increases 
by a factor of PI (or around 3 if you're not a maths person).

Even been at one of those carnivals where they have a spinning thing?
It's easier to stay near the centre, than near the edges, because you are moving
a *lot* quicker at the edges.

And just for the hell of it;

If you have a 3 unit disc doing 1 RPM

If you're 1/2 unit out you're doing  ~3 units/sec
If you're one unit out, you're doing ~6 units/sec
If you're two units out you're doing ~12 units/sec
at three;~18 units/sec

Multiply by 7200 and s/units/inches/
The outside of your disk is really moving

The density of the sectors at the outer edge is lighter than
near the centre, which mitigates the speed some what.

See Also: artficial gravity in space stations/ships/objects


-- 
Totally Holistic Enterprises Internet|  | Andrew Milton
The Internet (Aust) Pty Ltd  |  |
ACN: 082 081 472 ABN: 83 082 081 472 |  M:+61 416 022 411   | Carpe Daemon
PO Box 837 Indooroopilly QLD 4068|[EMAIL PROTECTED]| 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message



Re: Dangerously dedicated yet again (was: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_diskmbr.c)

2001-12-09 Thread Greg Lehey

On Sunday,  9 December 2001 at 22:44:52 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
 3) You get a system lockup when booting the *computer* if *any* DD disk
is attached anywhere at all.  This is what killed the Thinkpad T20*,
A20*, 600X etc.  After all the yelling we did at IBM, it turned out
to be FreeBSD's fault.  It also happens on Dell systems.  It kills
all IA64 boxes if a FreeBSD/i386 disk is attached anywhere.

What are you talking about?  The IBM lockup was due to the presence of
*Microsoft partition* of type 0xn5, for any value of n.  If these
systems also lock up with a dedicated disk, it's due to some other
bug.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message