date:20030128

i386 tinderbox failure

2003-01-28 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav

/home/des/tinderbox/tinderbox.sh: /home/des/tinderbox/whereintheworld: not found

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

Re: I've just had a massive file system crash

2003-01-28 Thread Daniel O'Connor

On Sun, 2003-01-26 at 18:38, Greg Lehey wrote:
 Did you use shutdown -p?  If my hypothesis is correct, it's possible
 to get this result with shutdown -h if you press the power switch as
 soon as the System halted message appears, but normally you'd give
 it a few seconds longer.  With shutdown -p, it's immediate, modulo
 delay.

Not certain if I did, but it's likely.

-- 
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
GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140  AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5


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

This LOR is getting old fast...

2003-01-28 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp


Entropy harvesting: interrupts ethernet point_to_point.
lock order reversal
 1st 0xc4123858 process lock (process lock) @ ../../../kern/kern_descrip.c:2104
 2nd 0xc411ee34 filedesc structure (filedesc structure) @ ../../../kern/kern_des
crip.c:2111
Debugger(witness_lock)
Stopped at  Debugger+0x7e:  xchgl   %ebx,in_Debugger.0
db trace
Debugger(c0440775,c411ee34,c0455327,c0455327,c0455897) at Debugger+0x7e
witness_lock(c411ee34,8,c0455897,83f,c023d17d) at witness_lock+0xaff
_mtx_lock_flags(c411ee34,0,c0455897,83f,0) at _mtx_lock_flags+0x11a
sysctl_kern_file(c047f040,0,0,d7ad2c0c,d7ad2c0c) at sysctl_kern_file+0x221
sysctl_root(0,d7ad2ca8,2,d7ad2c0c,c41243c0) at sysctl_root+0x259
userland_sysctl(c41243c0,d7ad2ca8,2,bfbfe578,bfbff3f8) at userland_sysctl+0x20d
__sysctl(c41243c0,d7ad2d10,c046b22b,407,6) at __sysctl+0xe9
syscall(2f,2f,2f,2,bfbfe578) at syscall+0x412
Xint0x80_syscall() at Xint0x80_syscall+0x1d
--- syscall (202, FreeBSD ELF32, __sysctl), eip = 0x805a8e7, esp = 0xbfbfe52c, e
bp = 0xbfbfe558 ---
db

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

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

Re: VOP_STRATEGY on VCHR

2003-01-28 Thread phk

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Enache Adrian writes:
I get this when I try to access for the first time a file on an ext2fs
filesystem.

VOP_STRATEGY on VCHR

Please try this patch and let me know if it helps ?

Index: ext2_vnops.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/gnu/ext2fs/ext2_vnops.c,v
retrieving revision 1.75
diff -u -r1.75 ext2_vnops.c
--- ext2_vnops.c4 Jan 2003 08:47:19 -   1.75
+++ ext2_vnops.c28 Jan 2003 08:37:50 -
@@ -1528,7 +1528,7 @@
}
vp = ip-i_devvp;
bp-b_dev = vp-v_rdev;
-   VOP_STRATEGY(vp, bp);
+   VOP_SPECSTRATEGY(vp, bp);
return (0);
 }
 
-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp   | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer   | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

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

LOR fix.

2003-01-28 Thread Alfred Perlstein

Since the locking is wrong anyhow...


Index: kern_descrip.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/kern/kern_descrip.c,v
retrieving revision 1.183
diff -u -r1.183 kern_descrip.c
--- kern_descrip.c  21 Jan 2003 20:20:48 -  1.183
+++ kern_descrip.c  28 Jan 2003 09:02:56 -
@@ -2104,8 +2104,8 @@
PROC_LOCK(p);
xf.xf_pid = p-p_pid;
xf.xf_uid = p-p_ucred-cr_uid;
+   PROC_UNLOCK(p);
if ((fdp = p-p_fd) == NULL) {
-   PROC_UNLOCK(p);
continue;
}
FILEDESC_LOCK(fdp);
@@ -2125,7 +2125,6 @@
break;
}
FILEDESC_UNLOCK(fdp);
-   PROC_UNLOCK(p);
if (error)
break;
}


-- 
-Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using 1970s technology,
 start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.'

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

Re: Force 1 CPU on SMP kernel?

2003-01-28 Thread Ceri Davies

On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:33:02PM -0500, Adam Migus wrote:
 Hi,
 I'm doing some performance analysis on FreeBSD.  I would like to
 be able to make an SMP kernel use only one CPU.  Of course I
 realize running GENERIC would only use 1 CPU but the concern is
 that the overhead assoicated with SMP will skew the statistics. 
 So my question is what would be the 'best' way to make an SMP
 kernel only start/use CPU0?

Yank the others ?

Ceri
-- 
Happiness is having a scratch for every itch.
-- Ogden Nash

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

Re: Force 1 CPU on SMP kernel?

2003-01-28 Thread Odhiambo Washington

* Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20030128 12:50]: wrote:
 On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:33:02PM -0500, Adam Migus wrote:
  Hi,
  I'm doing some performance analysis on FreeBSD.  I would like to
  be able to make an SMP kernel use only one CPU.  Of course I
  realize running GENERIC would only use 1 CPU but the concern is
  that the overhead assoicated with SMP will skew the statistics. 
  So my question is what would be the 'best' way to make an SMP
  kernel only start/use CPU0?
 
 Yank the others ?
 

What about building two kernels, one SMP, the other non-SMP, then
just boot wheichever kernel you want? Doesn't it server same purpose?
Better than Ceri's idea ;)


-Wash

-- 
Odhiambo Washington   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  The box said 'Requires
Wananchi Online Ltd.  www.wananchi.com  Windows 95, NT, or better,'
Tel: +254 2 313985-9  +254 2 313922 so I installed FreeBSD.   
GSM: +254 72 743223   +254 733 744121   This sig is McQ!  :-)


I'd love to go out with you, but I'm converting my calendar watch from
Julian to Gregorian.

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

Re: Force 1 CPU on SMP kernel?

2003-01-28 Thread leafy

On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 12:53:49PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
   that the overhead assoicated with SMP will skew the statistics. 
   So my question is what would be the 'best' way to make an SMP
   kernel only start/use CPU0?
  
  Yank the others ?
  
 
 What about building two kernels, one SMP, the other non-SMP, then
 just boot wheichever kernel you want? Doesn't it server same purpose?
 Better than Ceri's idea ;)
 
 
 -Wash
Unless I read him wrong, but I think he wants a SMP kernel to run on a single CPU. 
Besides pulling the thing out of the box, is it possible to disable one of them via 
BIOS?

Jiawei Ye  

-- 
Without the userland, the kernel is useless.
 --inspired by The Tao of Programming

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

Re: Does bg fsck have problems with large filesystems?

2003-01-28 Thread Attila Nagy

Hello,

 I've just installed my first 5.0-rel system and did some
 torture-testing. When resetting the machine to test the backgrounded
 fsck I experienced the following problem: All filesystems came back
 quickly and bg fsck worked fine, except for one. I had created a large
 (50GB) /export filesystem on with fsck reproducively hang.
See PR kern/47105.
Although it speaks of much larger filesystems, than your, the problem is
there.

I've already written to Kirk McKusick, but it seems that he has a lot of
work, because I didn't get answer.

If anybody wants to look into this problem, I can give access to the
machine (even serial console)...

--[ Free Software ISOs - http://www.fsn.hu/?f=download ]--
Attila Nagy e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Free Software Network (FSN.HU)phone @work: +361 210 1415 (194)
cell.: +3630 306 6758

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

Re: Force 1 CPU on SMP kernel?

2003-01-28 Thread Juli Mallett

* De: Odhiambo Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ Data: 2003-01-28 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Force 1 CPU on SMP kernel? ]
 * Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20030128 12:50]: wrote:
  On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:33:02PM -0500, Adam Migus wrote:
   Hi,
   I'm doing some performance analysis on FreeBSD.  I would like to
   be able to make an SMP kernel use only one CPU.  Of course I
   realize running GENERIC would only use 1 CPU but the concern is
   that the overhead assoicated with SMP will skew the statistics. 
   So my question is what would be the 'best' way to make an SMP
   kernel only start/use CPU0?
  
  Yank the others ?
  
 
 What about building two kernels, one SMP, the other non-SMP, then
 just boot wheichever kernel you want? Doesn't it server same purpose?
 Better than Ceri's idea ;)

You're missing the point.  He wants to boot only the bootstrap processor,
none of the APs, but still be running an SMP kernel.  I think checking how
much overhead SMP and APIC_IO add is a noble goal, and throwing real
SMP into the mix would be dumb.
-- 
Juli Mallett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: BSDFlata -- IRC: juli on EFnet
OpenDarwin, Mono, FreeBSD Developer
ircd-hybrid Developer, EFnet addict
FreeBSD on MIPS-Anything on FreeBSD

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

5.0-RELEASE panics during the floppies boot

2003-01-28 Thread Rostislav Krasny

Hello

FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE panics during the floppies boot with following
messages:

panic: inthand_add: Can't initialize ICU
syncing disks, buffers remaining... panic: bdwrite: buffer is not busy

The box have two ISA PnP cards - a NIC based on UMC UM9008/F chip and
Creative SB16 based on ViBRA16 chip. There are no PCI cards although
there are 4 PCI slots. The video card is ATI XPERT 98 AGP based on ATI
RAGE XL chip. There is also one non-PnP ISA card - a hardware 33600bps
modem based on Rockwell chip.

The BIOS have PnP OS option that can be set to No or Yes. If it
set to No the BIOS initialize all PnP devices, including ISA PnP
devices. Before the MBR loading (boot0) BIOS prints on the screen a
diagnostic information about all initialized PnP devices, including
choosen to them resurces (IRQs, DMA channels). In my case it choose IRQ
10 for my ISA PnP NIC and IRQ 5 with DMA channel 0 and 1 for my ISA PnP
Creative SB16. Currently installed OS-es are FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE and
Win98SE.

Win98SE get to know that BIOS already initialized all ISA PnP devices.
Win98SE use the same resurces that BIOS choose. The resurces are IRQ 10
and I/O port range 0x0240-0x025F for the NIC and IRQ 5 with DMA
channels 0 and 1 for the SB16. Port ranges of SB16 are not so
interesting for us, so I don't tell they.

FreeBSD 4.7-RELEASE don't know that or don't use PnP BIOS features.
Instead 4.7 re-initialize all of my ISA PnP devices with different
resurces' parameters. For example, it use IRQ 5 and I/O port range
0x0200-0x021F for the NIC.

FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE (when I do floppies boot) try to use IRQ 2 and same
I/O port range for the NIC. It prints following line just before the
panic:

ed1: ISA PLUG PLAY Ethernet Card at port 0x200-0x21f irq 2 on isa0

If I set in my BIOS the PnP OS option to Yes I don't get this line
but FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE still panics during the boot. The panic
messages are exactly the same.

So, we have two problems:
1. FreeBSD (all versions) do not know about BIOS's PnP devices
configuration support (at least for ISA PnP devices).
2. When FreeBSD 5.0 try to configure PnP devices (at least ISA PnP
devices) it do it wrong way. FreeBSD 4.7 do it better but
not perfect.

I think that future FreeBSD releases must be able to work better with
PnP BIOS features. Plug and Play configuration capability must be
improved too, especially in 5.X.

95 matches

Mail list logo