Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Soren Kristensen

Hi Everybody,

I've been following the sync serial board discussion a little, and it
seems like that there's no source for inexpensive sync serial boards
with FreeBSD, or boards with documentation to make a driver, or from
companies with a good policy towards open source and/or FreeBSD

The only one close seems to be the cronyx, they seems to have full
source code, but their boards is not easily available in the US, or
available with T1 interfaces.

So maybe I should just make one, and sell for cheap, I need them anyway
for my small boxes (see http://www.soekris.com) The most common chip
for the PCI bus, the 4 channel Infinion DSCC4 PEB20534 (used by cronyx
and others...) cost around $60 in small volume, so the basic 2 ch board
would probably go for around $250 qty 1. Boards with more channels or
integrated T1/E1 phys will be a little higher.

FreeBSd drivers should be relatively easy, t.ex based on the cronyx
drivers, they're even netgraph enabled

I would then be happy to supply hardware and documentation to somebody
that could do and maintain the drivers.


Regards,


Soren Kristensen

Soekris Engineering

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



RE: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Ted Mittelstaedt

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Hass
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 7:23 PM
To: Jim Bryant
Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; MurrayTaylor;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alfred
Shippen
Subject: Re: FYI


Also--understand that the replacement for the 400 and 405 is a
multi-interface card (supports all of the wiring specs instead of just 1),
and costs virtually the same (or less as a reseller or in volume) than the
400/405 did.


And if you want to sell these to FreeBSD users then make your Linux driver
source (not the SAND stuff) available so that we can mod it into our own
driver.  Many other companies do this and as a matter of fact, we (meaning
FreeBSD) have even found bugs in crummy Linux drivers that have been reported
back to Linux and helped those manufacturers better their products.

No offense, but once Imagestream stopped selling WANic400's you
ceased being an entity of interest to FreeBSD, as you no longer sell
any products that run under it.

Ted Mittelstaedt   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author of:   The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:  http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com

Doug

On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Jim Bryant wrote:

 No offense to you or your sales partners, but the way I see it,
this means that tons of these will be available for a song on eBay
 soon, and will be in the hands of a lot of FreeBSD and Linux
people [not all of which can afford top-of-the-line all of the time].

 Doug Hass wrote:

  Ted,
 
  We're SBS' worldwide distributor.  Others who resell them buy
them from us
  or from one of our distributors.  In any case, I can ASSURE you without a
  doubt that the WANic 400 series and the entire RISCom/N2 series
are end of
  life as of the end of September.
 
  If you have questions, feel free to contact me at your convenience.
 
  Regards,
 
  Doug
 
  -
 
  Doug Hass
  ImageStream Internet Solutions
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  http://www.imagestream.com
  Office: 1-219-935-8484
  Fax: 1-219-935-8488


 jim
 --
   ET has one helluva sense of humor!
  He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos!
 -
 POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
 -
 Religious fundamentalism is the biggest threat to
  international security that exists today.
  United Nations Secretary General B.B.Ghali


 _
 Do You Yahoo!?
 Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



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



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



RE: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Ted Mittelstaedt

-Original Message-
From: Soren Kristensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 1:17 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: MurrayTaylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based
alternatives??


Hi Everybody,

I've been following the sync serial board discussion a little, and it
seems like that there's no source for inexpensive sync serial boards
with FreeBSD, or boards with documentation to make a driver, or from
companies with a good policy towards open source and/or FreeBSD

The only one close seems to be the cronyx, they seems to have full
source code, but their boards is not easily available in the US, or
available with T1 interfaces.

So maybe I should just make one, and sell for cheap, I need them anyway
for my small boxes (see http://www.soekris.com) The most common chip
for the PCI bus, the 4 channel Infinion DSCC4 PEB20534 (used by cronyx
and others...) cost around $60 in small volume, so the basic 2 ch board
would probably go for around $250 qty 1. Boards with more channels or
integrated T1/E1 phys will be a little higher.

FreeBSd drivers should be relatively easy, t.ex based on the cronyx
drivers, they're even netgraph enabled

I would then be happy to supply hardware and documentation to somebody
that could do and maintain the drivers.


An interesting proposition.  However, you might find it even easier to
do a Hitachi HD64570-based board.  It should be much easier to modify
the sr driver to work with it than to write a new one from scratch.


Ted Mittelstaedt   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author of:   The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:  http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com


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



Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Soren Kristensen writes:

So maybe I should just make one, and sell for cheap, I need them anyway
for my small boxes (see http://www.soekris.com) The most common chip
for the PCI bus, the 4 channel Infinion DSCC4 PEB20534 (used by cronyx
and others...) cost around $60 in small volume, so the basic 2 ch board
would probably go for around $250 qty 1. Boards with more channels or
integrated T1/E1 phys will be a little higher.

We already have drivers in the tree for the infinion MUNICHX chip,
when used with a FALC frontend.  We also have drivers for the MUSYCC
from Conexant.

-- 
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-hackers in the body of the message



[no subject]

2001-10-15 Thread Martin Vana

still aint working (connection dropped on reset, unknown error 0);
Im a total newbie so maybe I did something wrong, i did exactly this,

cd /usr/ports/someport
make FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-p

hi,
when i am trying to port some program from ports directory (4.3stable) it
never connects to a ftp. Problem might be a firewall, there are so few
ports
allowed, but 21 is. Anyone has the same experience?

Of course, establishing an active data connection also means having the
server connect to an ephemeral port on your machine which is not allowed.

make FETCH_BEFORE_ARGS=-p

will give you passive ftp instead.




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



RE: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Ted Mittelstaedt

-Original Message-
From: Poul-Henning Kamp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 2:05 AM
To: Soren Kristensen
Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt; MurrayTaylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based
alternatives?? 


In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Soren Kristensen writes:

So maybe I should just make one, and sell for cheap, I need them anyway
for my small boxes (see http://www.soekris.com) The most common chip
for the PCI bus, the 4 channel Infinion DSCC4 PEB20534 (used by cronyx
and others...) cost around $60 in small volume, so the basic 2 ch board
would probably go for around $250 qty 1. Boards with more channels or
integrated T1/E1 phys will be a little higher.

We already have drivers in the tree for the infinion MUNICHX chip,
when used with a FALC frontend.  We also have drivers for the MUSYCC
from Conexant.


Ha hmm - Poul, do you how what the reference boards were that these
drivers were tested/developed with?

Ted Mittelstaedt   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author of:   The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:  http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com



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



Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Soren Kristensen

Hi,

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
 
 An interesting proposition.  However, you might find it even easier to
 do a Hitachi HD64570-based board.  It should be much easier to modify
 the sr driver to work with it than to write a new one from scratch.
 

As other people already has said, it don't looks like that Hitachi is in
it for the long run, and it's not for higher speeds, I would like to
also be able to do E3/T3. And anyway, the HD64570 is not a PCI chip,
requering additional chips to interface to the PCI bus.


Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

 
 We already have drivers in the tree for the infinion MUNICHX chip,
 when used with a FALC frontend.  We also have drivers for the MUSYCC
 from Conexant.
 

The PEB20321 (Munich32) supported in that driver is a channelized
version, that not really what people are asking for It's also low
speed, and support only one interface if used unchannelized. I don't
remember about the Conexant chip, but I think it's channelized too.
Paul, do you know how close the PEB20321 and PEB20534 are from a
programming point if view ? But the FALC phy might be good for the T1/E1
versions.

I have look around for sync serial controllers, but keep comming back to
the PEB20534, I think that the best chip available for the job.


Regards,


Soren

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



Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message 002f01c15557$44f1d660$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ted Mittelstaedt 
writes:

An interesting proposition.  However, you might find it even easier to
do a Hitachi HD64570-based board.  It should be much easier to modify
the sr driver to work with it than to write a new one from scratch.

We want something with an integral T1/E1 DSU/CSU, otherwise cost is
still prohibitive.

-- 
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-hackers in the body of the message



Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Soren Kristensen writes:

The PEB20321 (Munich32) supported in that driver is a channelized
version, that not really what people are asking for It's also low
speed, and support only one interface if used unchannelized. 

One one wire you have only one circuit if unchannelized.

There is a bigger brother MUNIC128X now which is suitable for
an 4 port card.

I don't
remember about the Conexant chip, but I think it's channelized too.

Both the Munich and Connexant can run channelized or unchannelized.

Paul, do you know how close the PEB20321 and PEB20534 are from a
programming point if view ? But the FALC phy might be good for the T1/E1
versions.

I have look around for sync serial controllers, but keep comming back to
the PEB20534, I think that the best chip available for the job.

I don't know how similar they are, either way, all the work on the if_mn
and musycc drivers were in the framers and clocking.  The HDLC is just
a piece of cake...

-- 
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-hackers in the body of the message



Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp

In message 003e01c1555b$db6e2c20$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ted Mittelstaedt 

We already have drivers in the tree for the infinion MUNICHX chip,
when used with a FALC frontend.  We also have drivers for the MUSYCC
from Conexant.

Ha hmm - Poul, do you how what the reference boards were that these
drivers were tested/developed with?

Yes I know (since I wrote them :-)

The MUNICHX driver were written on the EASY321 eval kit from Siemens
(Now Infinieon) and the MUSYCC was written on LMC's 1504 card which
is now discontinued.

-- 
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-hackers in the body of the message



RE: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based alternatives??

2001-10-15 Thread Ted Mittelstaedt

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Poul-Henning
Kamp
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 2:53 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Soren Kristensen; MurrayTaylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: WanIC 405 _IS_ End of Life -- what are the (netgraph) based
alternatives?? 


We want something with an integral T1/E1 DSU/CSU, otherwise cost is
still prohibitive.

as long as there's a carrier detect and a DTE light I hope.  A little button
for a hard loop would be good too.

Ted Mittelstaedt   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author of:   The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:  http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com



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



Re: My contributions to the close a PR campaign

2001-10-15 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav

Seth Kingsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Why not remove it after using it to restore the mixer state?  It would
 only exist to survive a reboot.

You'd have to reset everything manually after a crash.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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



RE: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Doug Hass

 And if you want to sell these to FreeBSD users then make your Linux driver
 source (not the SAND stuff) available so that we can mod it into our own
 driver.  Many other companies do this and as a matter of fact, we (meaning
 FreeBSD) have even found bugs in crummy Linux drivers that have been reported
 back to Linux and helped those manufacturers better their products.

I'm not going to get dragged into an OS war.  Both Linux and FreeBSD
have their share of crummy drivers and features.  That discussion is
honestly beyond the scope of a discussion of ImageStream's SAND
architecture and the WANic 400 series.

We are bound by third party agreements and are not allowed to release any
more free code (legally) than we already have.  If we were not restricted
by SBS, Trillium, and Rockwell (among others), we would release all of the
code under GPL or lGPL.  These agreements do NOT prevent us from working
with developers to support other platforms, though.  It only prevents the
free release of portions of the code. 

That being said, we're always interested in supporting a wide variety of
platforms.  Without the SAND architecture, though, there really is little
hope of having FreeBSD support for the WANic 520 series cards (or other
cards, for that matter).  If there are developers in the community
interested in porting SAND and the various hardware modules (for the 520
series and other cards) to FreeBSD, we'll be happy to work with them and
support that effort.  It is in ALL of our interests to have the widest
support for standards-based technologies as possible.

 No offense, but once Imagestream stopped selling WANic400's you
 ceased being an entity of interest to FreeBSD, as you no longer sell
 any products that run under it.

I'll reiterate what I've said to you privately:  ImageStream DID NOT make
the decision to discontinue the 400 series or the RISCom/N2 series.  This
decision rested solely with SBS.

However, FreeBSD users are NOT without options: 

1) FreeBSD users can still get the WANic 400 and RISCom cards from the
second hand market, as another person mentioned.

2) WANic 400 series cards are still available in quantity.  If the market
for FreeBSD is as large as you claim, then you or someone else in the
community should have no problem snapping up a quantity of these cards and
reselling them to interested parties.  I'll go one step further: If anyone
contacts me about the WANic 400 series, mentions that they are for
FreeBSD, I promise to give an extra 15% discount over and above our normal
volume discounts just to illustrate my desire to support the FreeBSD
community.

3) Virtually ALL of our customers, save for OEMs making their own
products, purchase complete routers.  Going this route would eliminate the
need to have FreeBSD support, as any user would have a standalone router.

Regards,

Doug

-

Doug Hass
ImageStream Internet Solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.imagestream.com
Office: 1-219-935-8484
Fax: 1-219-935-8488


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



Re: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Leo Bicknell

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 08:53:14AM -0500, Doug Hass wrote:
 We are bound by third party agreements and are not allowed to release any
 more free code (legally) than we already have.  If we were not restricted
 by SBS, Trillium, and Rockwell (among others), we would release all of the
 code under GPL or lGPL.  These agreements do NOT prevent us from working
 with developers to support other platforms, though.  It only prevents the
 free release of portions of the code. 

Would your agreements allow you to provide resources to a small
number of developers (under NDA and all that of course) to produce
drivers that you would then release in binary form (eg a kernel
module) under a free license?

If you cannot release the source code to your drivers, can you
release hardware programming specifications (again, perhaps under
NDA) that allowed someone to develop an independant free licensed
driver?

-- 
Leo Bicknell - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Engineer - Internetworking Engineer - CCIE 3440
Read TMBG List - [EMAIL PROTECTED], www.tmbg.org

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



Re: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Doug Hass

 Would your agreements allow you to provide resources to a small
 number of developers (under NDA and all that of course) to produce
 drivers that you would then release in binary form (eg a kernel
 module) under a free license?

It sure would.

 If you cannot release the source code to your drivers, can you
 release hardware programming specifications (again, perhaps under
 NDA) that allowed someone to develop an independant free licensed
 driver?

Unfortunately, the API to the cards (the driver development kit, hardware
programming specifications or whatever you want to call them) are licensed
from several third parties and we are bound by agreement not to make them
public.  The 400 series cards (and, for that matter, the RISCom/N2 series
cards) did not require an API, which is how BSDI and FreeBSD drivers came
about in the first place.

As I mentioned above, we CAN license the driver code and the DDK for
development.  This means that you could produce FreeBSD drivers which we
could then distribute in a binary form under a free end-user license.

Regards,

Doug

-

Doug Hass
ImageStream Internet Solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.imagestream.com
Office: 1-219-935-8484
Fax: 1-219-935-8488


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



Re: Adding support for Duxbury PCI modem to FreeBSD 4.4

2001-10-15 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peter 
van Heusden writes:
: I noticed that PCI modems are detected in /sys/isa/sio.c. I added the
: chip 
: id of the modem to the list of PCI devices (pci_ids), and now
: sio_pci_probe detects the modem, but the sioprobe() fails. Before I got
: digging into the sioprobe code (which seems rather complex), I'd like to
: verify that my pci_ids entry is correct.
:
: One thing I don't understand is the rid field of the pci_id structure.
: Some modems have this set to 0x10, others to 0x14. I'm not sure what to
: set it 
: to - how do I determine this?

look for the I/o space bar.  this will be the the ones in the range
0x10-0x24 that are odd (as in bit 0 is set).  note, bars are 4 bytes
long (except for some 64 bit cards, but you can safely ignore that).

Alternatively,
pciconf -r pciX:Y:Z 0x10:0x2f
and post it to the list.  

Warner

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



Re: clustering code

2001-10-15 Thread Fabián Salamanca

Ok Ron, well you're right, a bunch-of-more code is not really useful, I'll check Plan 9, it seems it convinced you a little bit, :-)
thanks, and regards,
Fabián

From: Ronald G Minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Rayson Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Fabián Salamanca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: clustering code 
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 21:21:58 -0600 (MDT) 
 
On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Rayson Ho wrote: 
 
  http://ssic-linux.sourceforge.net/ 
 
A collection of some really bad ideas, not likely to scale well. Note that 
they've got up to 30 nodes, wow. Double it once and that's where this kind 
of "global everything" idea starts to fall over. Badly. 
 
It would be neat to see freebsd do something really new and novel in 
clustering. ssci-linux is not it. It's going to be very hard to pick 
something new, a lot of the ground is well-trod. 
 
For other examples of what you can do (maybe not what you SHOULD do) see 
npaci ROCKS, OSCAR, and follow the references from there. 
 
On the should-do list, see plan 9 -- (on plan 9 I tend to sound like a 
broken record) read and understand the Plan 9 stuff, see how well it would 
work as a cluster technology (we have a 32-node plan 9 cluster here, it's 
quite cool), and see about bringing those neat ideas to freebsd. 
 
ron 
 
Descargue GRATUITAMENTE MSN Explorer en http://explorer.msn.com

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


Re: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Doug Hass

In a private e-mail, Leo writes:

 You offered a discount on these boards on the list.  If you think there
 is a real opportunity to sell these to the *BSD crowd, I recomend you
 take that 15% (or some part of it) and offer to partially fund a driver
 developer.  There are many freelance programmers working on the project
 who for $1000-$5000 (depending on complexity) could make your driver a
 reality. A good developer could probably also make them work under
 OpenBSD and NetBSD in one fell swoop. 

I'd be happy to pledge the 15% to a driver developer.  That's a
great idea!  It will accomplish two objectives:

1) There will be at least 100 WANic 400 series cards available for
purchase to support existing installations (assuming someone out there
places the order).

2) ImageStream will pledge 15% of the purchase price of any lots of these
400 series cards toward porting of our SAND architecture to FreeBSD. 
That's a MINIMUM of $8,100 that ImageStream is willing to pay a developer
or group of developers to port the drivers for the rest of the cards.

Ted--you've indicated that there is a significant market for the 400
series cards in the community.  Why don't you contact me privately and
we'll get you an order of the cards so that we can accomplish the above.

Regards,

Doug

-

Doug Hass
ImageStream Internet Solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.imagestream.com
Office: 1-219-935-8484
Fax: 1-219-935-8488



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



Re: contigfree, free what?

2001-10-15 Thread mark tinguely

I have a potentially silly question about contigmalloc1(), if the very
unlikely occurance that the kernel VM space ran out, (the vm_map_findspace()
failed) wouldn't we want to return the chunk of contiguous physical space
back on the free queue before we return an allocation failure?

--mark tinguely.

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



Re: contigfree, free what?

2001-10-15 Thread Matt Dillon


:
:I have a potentially silly question about contigmalloc1(), if the very
:unlikely occurance that the kernel VM space ran out, (the vm_map_findspace()
:failed) wouldn't we want to return the chunk of contiguous physical space
:back on the free queue before we return an allocation failure?
:
:--mark tinguely.

Ah, you came across that XXX comment?  You are absolutely right.  The
original implementor rushed writing the routine and didn't finish it.
contigmalloc() is only supposed to be used in the early life of the
system when its loading device drivers that need contiguous space,
so the case is not supposed to come up.  Of course, that means that it
does come up from time to time :-(.

If you want to have a go at fixing it I will be happy to review.

-Matt


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



debugging question

2001-10-15 Thread David E. Cross

I received the following from gdb today:

#0  0x0 in ?? ()
#1  0x280a8d22 in svc_getreqset2 () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#2  0x280a8c5b in svc_getreqset () from /usr/lib/libc.so.4
#3  0x804c85f in yp_svc_run ()
#4  0x804cd94 in main ()
#5  0x8049a09 in _start ()

Uhm... I didn't think that was possible.  I thought the kernel stored the
last stack frame iteslf, from the SIG handler in kernel-space.

-- 
David Cross   | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Lab Director  | Rm: 308 Lally Hall
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, | Ph: 518.276.2860
Department of Computer Science| Fax: 518.276.4033
I speak only for myself.  | WinNT:Linux::Linux:FreeBSD

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



Re: contigfree, free what?

2001-10-15 Thread mark tinguely


Assuming we are using Thomas' patch that already removed the vm_page_wire()
from the earlier for loop, then at the point of this VM space allocation
failure, we haven't done anything too serious to the vm_page nor to the pmap,
nor are they in any object. We should be able to simply place it back to the
colored free list, something as easy as:

*** vm_page.c   Mon Oct 15 10:26:14 2001
--- vm_page.c.new   Mon Oct 15 11:32:46 2001
***
*** 1934,1939 
--- 1934,1942 
 * above available.
 */
vm_map_unlock(map);
+   for (i = start; i  (start + size / PAGE_SIZE); i++) {
+   (void)vm_add_new_page(VM_PAGE_TO_PHYS(pga[i]));
+   }
splx(s);
return (NULL);
}


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



Re: Severe I/O Problems

2001-10-15 Thread Jay Rossiter


dmesg:
atapci0: Intel ICH2 ATA100 controller port 0xffa0-0xffaf at device 31.1
on pci0
ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0
ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0
ad0: 38146MB Maxtor 5T040H4 [77504/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA100
acd0: DVD-ROM SAMSUNG DVD-ROM SD-612 at ata1-master using PIO4

sysctl:
hw.ata.ata_dma: 1
hw.ata.wc: 0
hw.ata.tags: 0
hw.ata.atapi_dma: 0
hw.atamodes: dma,---,pio,---,

mount:
/dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local)
/dev/ad0s1d on /home (ufs, local)
/dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local)
/dev/ad0s1h on /usr/ports (ufs, asynchronous, local)
/dev/ad0s1g on /usr/src (ufs, asynchronous, local)
/dev/ad0s1e on /var (ufs, local)

All of the data work for this project is taking place on /home


The writecache flag appeared as though it was going to help significantly,
however the total run took about five hours longer than previous.  (~21
hours)

Start:  Fri Oct 12 15:16:35 PDT 2001
Stop:  Sat Oct 13 12:28:40 PDT 2001







   

Mikko  

Tyolajarvi   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[EMAIL PROTECTED]   cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   

e   Subject: Re: Severe I/O Problems  

   

10/12/2001 

05:25 PM   

   

   





In local.freebsd.hackers you write:

There appear to be a lot of changes that went into the filesystem and I/O
code between 4.3 and 4.4.  A little over a week ago I upgraded my 4.3 box
to 4.4-STABLE and immediately I started having I/O slowdown.  I do
development and QA on a program that is very I/O bound, but the changes
between 4.3 and 4.4 aren't small enough that I can ignore them.

A few statistics:

BSD, P4 1.4GHz, ATA100 drives
- Normal test run on 4.3 was taking ~3 hours.
- Normal test run on 4.4 is taking 15-16 hours.

P3-800, ATA66 drives, SuSE Linux 7.1:
- Normal test run takes ~4.5 hours.

UltraSparc 10, Solaris 8, ATA66 drives:
- Normal test run takes ~6 hours.

As you can see, this jump was just phenomenal.

Yup, sure looks bad.  Post output from at least:

 % dmesg | grep ata
 % sysctl -a | grep ata
 % mount | grep ufs

to give people something more to go on.

  $.02,
  /Mikko
--
 Mikko
Työläjä[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 RSA Security




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



Re: Severe I/O Problems

2001-10-15 Thread Matthew Jacob


Well- that's good to know. WC helps you overall. That was my one idea.

On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Jay Rossiter wrote:


 dmesg:
 atapci0: Intel ICH2 ATA100 controller port 0xffa0-0xffaf at device 31.1
 on pci0
 ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0
 ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0
 ad0: 38146MB Maxtor 5T040H4 [77504/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA100
 acd0: DVD-ROM SAMSUNG DVD-ROM SD-612 at ata1-master using PIO4

 sysctl:
 hw.ata.ata_dma: 1
 hw.ata.wc: 0
 hw.ata.tags: 0
 hw.ata.atapi_dma: 0
 hw.atamodes: dma,---,pio,---,

 mount:
 /dev/ad0s1a on / (ufs, local)
 /dev/ad0s1d on /home (ufs, local)
 /dev/ad0s1f on /usr (ufs, local)
 /dev/ad0s1h on /usr/ports (ufs, asynchronous, local)
 /dev/ad0s1g on /usr/src (ufs, asynchronous, local)
 /dev/ad0s1e on /var (ufs, local)

 All of the data work for this project is taking place on /home


 The writecache flag appeared as though it was going to help significantly,
 however the total run took about five hours longer than previous.  (~21
 hours)

 Start:  Fri Oct 12 15:16:35 PDT 2001
 Stop:  Sat Oct 13 12:28:40 PDT 2001








 Mikko
 Tyolajarvi   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 e   Subject: Re: Severe I/O Problems

 10/12/2001
 05:25 PM






 In local.freebsd.hackers you write:

 There appear to be a lot of changes that went into the filesystem and I/O
 code between 4.3 and 4.4.  A little over a week ago I upgraded my 4.3 box
 to 4.4-STABLE and immediately I started having I/O slowdown.  I do
 development and QA on a program that is very I/O bound, but the changes
 between 4.3 and 4.4 aren't small enough that I can ignore them.

 A few statistics:

 BSD, P4 1.4GHz, ATA100 drives
 - Normal test run on 4.3 was taking ~3 hours.
 - Normal test run on 4.4 is taking 15-16 hours.

 P3-800, ATA66 drives, SuSE Linux 7.1:
 - Normal test run takes ~4.5 hours.

 UltraSparc 10, Solaris 8, ATA66 drives:
 - Normal test run takes ~6 hours.

 As you can see, this jump was just phenomenal.

 Yup, sure looks bad.  Post output from at least:

  % dmesg | grep ata
  % sysctl -a | grep ata
  % mount | grep ufs

 to give people something more to go on.

   $.02,
   /Mikko
 --
  Mikko
 Työläjä[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  RSA Security




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



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



Más de 15.000 Empresas a su disposición

2001-10-15 Thread Rueda

Mensaje enviado por [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Empres@s - Colombia

Potente Herramienta para Mercadeo y Ventas.

Encuentre los clientes que usted necesita, con un simple click en nuestra
base de datos de más de 15Mil Empresas Importantes de Colombia, con más de
70.000 directivos y ejecutivos. La Base de Datos y la Aplicación le permiten
localizar y calificar sus mejores prospectos, aprender más sobre sus
clientes, proveedores y competidores y crear eficientes campañas de correo,
teléfono, e-mail, fax y campañas de campo.

La Base de Datos de Empresas (más de 15Mil) maneja los siguientes campos:
Razón Social, sigla, Nit, dirección, teléfono, fax, actividad empresarial
(código CIIU Rev. 3.0), número de empleados, ciudad y departamento. La Base
de Datos de directivos y ejecutivos (más de 70Mil) maneja los siguientes
campos: nombre, cargo, area por cargos, dirección, teléfono, fax. Estas
bases de datos se encuentran relacionadas, de tal forma que la aplicación
hace búsquedas simples o complejas por todos estos campos, agrupa diferentes
tipos de búsquedas, prepara e imprime reportes, rótulos y cartas, hace
llamadas telefónicas y envía email´s.

COMO VALOR AGREGADO le damos acceso a toda la información sobre COMERCIO
EXTERIOR, a través de enlaces Vía Internet a las Bases de Datos de MINCOMEX
(27000 Importadores), PROEXPO (4.000 Exportadores y sus ejecutivos), Y LA
COMUNIDAD ANDINA. También le facilitamos la conexión a sus propios enlaces.

Solicite información adicional vía email sobre contenido de la base de
datos, fuentes de la información, actualización, funciones que permite
ejecutar la aplicación, versiones, precios y empresas que la estan
utilizando,  o enviando los siguientes datos al Fax 6178102 - 6179073
Bogotá – Colombia o llamando directamente a Florentino Rueda, gerente
comercial al Cel. 033-3396180

Empresa
Nit
Ciudad
Dirección
Teléfono
Fax
Nombre
Cargo

P.D. Si este mensaje no es de su interés, considere dirigirlo a la Gerencia
General y/o Mercadeo, si no desea recibir mensajes como este, por favor
déjenos saberlo a [EMAIL PROTECTED] para eliminar su dirección en nuestra
base de datos.


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



RE: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Andrew C. Hornback

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Hass
 Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 9:53 AM
 To: Ted Mittelstaedt
 Cc: Jim Bryant; MurrayTaylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alfred Shippen
 Subject: RE: FYI

  And if you want to sell these to FreeBSD users then make your
 Linux driver
  source (not the SAND stuff) available so that we can mod it into our own
  driver.  Many other companies do this and as a matter of fact,
 we (meaning
  FreeBSD) have even found bugs in crummy Linux drivers that have
 been reported
  back to Linux and helped those manufacturers better their products.

 I'm not going to get dragged into an OS war.  Both Linux and FreeBSD
 have their share of crummy drivers and features.  That discussion is
 honestly beyond the scope of a discussion of ImageStream's SAND
 architecture and the WANic 400 series.

I don't believe Ted was trying to start an OS war, he's not that petty of a
person.  His point, and I hope that I'm not reading this incorrectly, is
that FreeBSD not only has fixed problems with drivers released by hardware
vendors, but also with drivers given over to us by the Linux group, as
that was all that we had to work with when the hardware vendors have refused
to provide any help whatsoever.

[snip]

  No offense, but once Imagestream stopped selling WANic400's you
  ceased being an entity of interest to FreeBSD, as you no longer sell
  any products that run under it.

 I'll reiterate what I've said to you privately:  ImageStream DID NOT make
 the decision to discontinue the 400 series or the RISCom/N2 series.  This
 decision rested solely with SBS.

 However, FreeBSD users are NOT without options:

 1) FreeBSD users can still get the WANic 400 and RISCom cards from the
 second hand market, as another person mentioned.

What is wrong with THIS picture?  You're telling people to purchase used
hardware, instead of purchasing components from your company?  *shakes his
head*

 2) WANic 400 series cards are still available in quantity.  If the market
 for FreeBSD is as large as you claim, then you or someone else in the
 community should have no problem snapping up a quantity of these cards and
 reselling them to interested parties.  I'll go one step further: If anyone
 contacts me about the WANic 400 series, mentions that they are for
 FreeBSD, I promise to give an extra 15% discount over and above our normal
 volume discounts just to illustrate my desire to support the FreeBSD
 community.

Perhaps a better idea, if I may be so bold, would be to offer samples of
the newer cards (520 series, I believe they are) to FreeBSD developers
interested in producing drivers, software and utilities for these cards.
After all, you are saying that the 400 is EOL.  Wouldn't the idea of
engineering samples be more beneficial to all involved?

 3) Virtually ALL of our customers, save for OEMs making their own
 products, purchase complete routers.  Going this route would eliminate the
 need to have FreeBSD support, as any user would have a standalone router.

This sounds quite argumentative to me.  Simply because everyone else is
buying a router, there's a refusal to support FreeBSD, since people with
true routers would have no need for using FreeBSD as a router engine.

It's a vicious cycle that I believe we're seeing here... chicken and the
egg, or rather, the driver and the market.  Without a proper driver, there
won't be a market for this card to be used with FreeBSD.  However, without
the manufacturer seeing visability in this market, there won't be a driver
as it would be a waste of their developers time.

--- Andy


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



RE: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Doug Hass

  1) FreeBSD users can still get the WANic 400 and RISCom cards from the
  second hand market, as another person mentioned.
 
   What is wrong with THIS picture?  You're telling people to purchase used
 hardware, instead of purchasing components from your company?  *shakes his
 head*

Perhaps you missed the earlier post.  Someone posted about purchasing used
gear or auction gear to go it on the cheap so to speak.  Personally, I
think wasting money on used, out-of-warranty, unsupported gear is akin to
playing Russian Roulette with your money.  I'd buy new every time.

 
  2) WANic 400 series cards are still available in quantity.  If the market
  for FreeBSD is as large as you claim, then you or someone else in the
  community should have no problem snapping up a quantity of these cards and
  reselling them to interested parties.  I'll go one step further: If anyone
  contacts me about the WANic 400 series, mentions that they are for
  FreeBSD, I promise to give an extra 15% discount over and above our normal
  volume discounts just to illustrate my desire to support the FreeBSD
  community.
 
   Perhaps a better idea, if I may be so bold, would be to offer samples of
 the newer cards (520 series, I believe they are) to FreeBSD developers
 interested in producing drivers, software and utilities for these cards.
 After all, you are saying that the 400 is EOL.  Wouldn't the idea of
 engineering samples be more beneficial to all involved?

Those have ALWAYS been available.  My phone rings all day.  I pick it up,
and it's never a BSD developer wanting to order cards and port drivers. :-)

All you have to do is ask.  Driver source, demo cards, and development
tools have been available to the BSD community since 1995.  To date, only
BSDI took up the effort, and only briefly.  Where are all the FreeBSD
developers and why aren't they beating down my door for these samples and
code?  I'll get back to this in a minute.

  3) Virtually ALL of our customers, save for OEMs making their own
  products, purchase complete routers.  Going this route would eliminate the
  need to have FreeBSD support, as any user would have a standalone router.
 
   This sounds quite argumentative to me.  Simply because everyone else is
 buying a router, there's a refusal to support FreeBSD, since people with
 true routers would have no need for using FreeBSD as a router engine.

Nope--it's just a matter of laying out the options.  There are 4--buy
used, buy new in quantity, and buy routers.  You can also develop drivers
for the new cards (they aren't new--they've been out for 3 years).

   It's a vicious cycle that I believe we're seeing here... chicken and the
 egg, or rather, the driver and the market.  Without a proper driver, there
 won't be a market for this card to be used with FreeBSD.  However, without
 the manufacturer seeing visability in this market, there won't be a driver
 as it would be a waste of their developers time.

It's not a vicious cycle at all.  Ted has said repeatedly in earlier
e-mails that there is a large market for the 400/405 and that
discontinuing them was foolish.  I've actually proposed a solution that
solves both problems.  I'll recap for those who missed my earlier message: 

1) If the *BSD community has the 400 series cards in such high demand,
someone should step up and order them in quantity.  This solves the issue
with the cards not being available in one and two unit quantities.  You'll
have a ready supply from someone in the community, and you'll be
supporting the community when you buy the cards from them.

2) If someone from the FreeBSD community orders the cards, ImageStream
will put up a minimum of $8,100 for a developer or developer group to port
drivers for the rest of the cards.  Actually, it's 15% of the purchase
price of any 400 series cards.  The more in demand the current cards
are, the more money we'll pledge to make sure that FreeBSd drivers exist
for ALL of the cards. 

My phone number is below.  If these cards and the future of the drivers
are as important as everyone who has posted says they are, let's move
quickly toward a solution. 

Regards,

Doug

-

Doug Hass
ImageStream Internet Solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.imagestream.com
Office: 1-219-935-8484
Fax: 1-219-935-8488



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



Re: Network Startup

2001-10-15 Thread Andrew Reid

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 04:22:21PM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote:

 In the last episode (Oct 15), j balan said:
  Does anyone know the command to reload rc.conf
 
 'reboot' is the only sure way.  

That's a bit of a problem as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps the network
scripts should be redesigned in a similar manner to the one taken on be
RedHat.

I started playing around with such a thing, using /usr/local/etc/rc.d/
as a base for 'network' scripts which take arguments such as 'start',
'stop' and 'restart'.

Implementation of such a thing would be fairly trivial methinks. What
are the thoughts on this sort of approach to management of network
interfaces and ancillary services?

   - andrew

-- 
void signature () {
cout  Andrew Reid -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]  endl;
cout  Cell: +61 401 946 813  endl;
cout  Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur  endl;
}

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



Re: Network Startup

2001-10-15 Thread Dan Nelson

In the last episode (Oct 16), Andrew Reid said:
 On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 04:22:21PM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote:
  In the last episode (Oct 15), j balan said:
   Does anyone know the command to reload rc.conf
  
  'reboot' is the only sure way.  
 
 That's a bit of a problem as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps the network
 scripts should be redesigned in a similar manner to the one taken on be
 RedHat.

Of course, you can always run the equivalent commands yourself to get
the system in synch with what you put in rc.conf.  i.e. if you added an
alias ip to an interface, you can run 

ifconfig xxx inet 1.2.3.4 alias

 I started playing around with such a thing, using usr/local/etc/rc.d/
 as a base for 'network' scripts which take arguments such as 'start',
 'stop' and 'restart'.

 Implementation of such a thing would be fairly trivial methinks. What
 are the thoughts on this sort of approach to management of network
 interfaces and ancillary services?

Is it smart enough to only add the alias interface on restart, or
does it try to deconfigure the whole NIC, and add all the IPs back? 
How about if you change an IP number?  Is it smart enough to kill and
restart named, inetd, smbd, or any other programs that might have bound
to that IP?  It's not as simple as I'll just rerun the ifconfig
commands, and I stand by reboot is the only sure way :)

-- 
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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



Re: Network Startup

2001-10-15 Thread Andrew Reid

On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 09:20:17PM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote:

  That's a bit of a problem as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps the network
  scripts should be redesigned in a similar manner to the one taken on be
  RedHat.
 
 Of course, you can always run the equivalent commands yourself to get
 the system in synch with what you put in rc.conf.  i.e. if you added an
 alias ip to an interface, you can run 
 
 ifconfig xxx inet 1.2.3.4 alias

Oh, for sure. That's what I, and the majority of the community, do
now. I think that it's not particularly convenient if you want to
restart the network if you've got 3 or 4 network interfaces.

  I started playing around with such a thing, using usr/local/etc/rc.d/
  as a base for 'network' scripts which take arguments such as 'start',
  'stop' and 'restart'.
 
  Implementation of such a thing would be fairly trivial methinks. What
  are the thoughts on this sort of approach to management of network
  interfaces and ancillary services?
 
 Is it smart enough to only add the alias interface on restart, or
 does it try to deconfigure the whole NIC, and add all the IPs back? 

I've only gone as far as nuking the entire interface and bringing it all
up again, including the alias. I've not tested the time difference
between doing it the way it current does, and being 'smart' (as you
say), and only configure the alias.

However, if someone issues 'sh network.sh restart', I'd expect just that
to happen -- the entire network to be restarted, not bits of it. 

Similarly, if I was to issue 'sh network.sh start rl0', I'd expect it to
start the interface from scratch. Perhaps there is room there for some
'smartness' whereby the ifconfig commands are only issued if the current
interface configuration is different to that in the configuration file.

 How about if you change an IP number?  Is it smart enough to kill and
 restart named, inetd, smbd, or any other programs that might have bound
 to that IP?  It's not as simple as I'll just rerun the ifconfig
 commands, and I stand by reboot is the only sure way :)

Perhaps it could be. For services that are controlled by
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/*.sh, it mightn't be that hard. Control of inetd,
named, smbd, or anything like that could also be done by a
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/*.sh file.

I can see this entire issue of startup scripts will spiral quickly into
a larger task if it was decided that there needed to be a change in the
way that the activity of other daemons such as inetd, named et al. were
controlled. Then again, I don't consider such a change as a bad thing.

   - andrew

-- 
void signature () {
cout  Andrew Reid -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]  endl;
cout  Cell: +61 401 946 813  endl;
cout  Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur  endl;
}

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



RE: FYI

2001-10-15 Thread Ted Mittelstaedt

-Original Message-
From: Andrew C. Hornback [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 2:59 PM
To: Doug Hass; Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: Jim Bryant; MurrayTaylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alfred Shippen
Subject: RE: FYI


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Hass
 Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 9:53 AM
 To: Ted Mittelstaedt
 Cc: Jim Bryant; MurrayTaylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alfred Shippen
 Subject: RE: FYI

  And if you want to sell these to FreeBSD users then make your
 Linux driver
  source (not the SAND stuff) available so that we can mod it into our own
  driver.  Many other companies do this and as a matter of fact,
 we (meaning
  FreeBSD) have even found bugs in crummy Linux drivers that have
 been reported
  back to Linux and helped those manufacturers better their products.

 I'm not going to get dragged into an OS war.  Both Linux and FreeBSD
 have their share of crummy drivers and features.  That discussion is
 honestly beyond the scope of a discussion of ImageStream's SAND
 architecture and the WANic 400 series.

   I don't believe Ted was trying to start an OS war, he's not 
that petty of a
person. 

been there, done that. :-)  No, it's not an OS war, just trying to illustrate
why making source available is a Good Thing.

 His point, and I hope that I'm not reading this incorrectly, is
that FreeBSD not only has fixed problems with drivers released by hardware
vendors, but also with drivers given over to us by the Linux group, as
that was all that we had to work with when the hardware vendors have refused
to provide any help whatsoever.


correct.

[snip]

  No offense, but once Imagestream stopped selling WANic400's you
  ceased being an entity of interest to FreeBSD, as you no longer sell
  any products that run under it.

 I'll reiterate what I've said to you privately:  ImageStream DID NOT make
 the decision to discontinue the 400 series or the RISCom/N2 series.  This
 decision rested solely with SBS.

 However, FreeBSD users are NOT without options:

 1) FreeBSD users can still get the WANic 400 and RISCom cards from the
 second hand market, as another person mentioned.

   What is wrong with THIS picture?  You're telling people to 
purchase used
hardware, instead of purchasing components from your company?  *shakes his
head*


I'll point out that the 1000 cards closed out is not used hardware, it's
brand new stuff that's never been opened.  This is quite common in the
hardware industry.  The difficulty is finding out who that highest bidder
was and if they are going to use those 1000 cards for themselves or are
going to sell them off in dribs and drabs over the next 10 years.

 2) WANic 400 series cards are still available in quantity.  If the market
 for FreeBSD is as large as you claim, then you or someone else in the
 community should have no problem snapping up a quantity of these cards and
 reselling them to interested parties.  I'll go one step further: If anyone
 contacts me about the WANic 400 series, mentions that they are for
 FreeBSD, I promise to give an extra 15% discount over and above our normal
 volume discounts just to illustrate my desire to support the FreeBSD
 community.

   Perhaps a better idea, if I may be so bold, would be to offer 
samples of
the newer cards (520 series, I believe they are) to FreeBSD developers
interested in producing drivers, software and utilities for these cards.
After all, you are saying that the 400 is EOL.  Wouldn't the idea of
engineering samples be more beneficial to all involved?


Just about every hardware vendor is happy to provide samples to developers,
anyone working on this would get plenty of support.

 3) Virtually ALL of our customers, save for OEMs making their own
 products, purchase complete routers.  Going this route would eliminate the
 need to have FreeBSD support, as any user would have a standalone router.

   This sounds quite argumentative to me.  Simply because 
everyone else is
buying a router, there's a refusal to support FreeBSD, since people with
true routers would have no need for using FreeBSD as a router engine.


No company is going to support a product that has no market, and it's
reasonable to ask who would buy these cards since Cisco's are so cheap
on the seconds market.

   It's a vicious cycle that I believe we're seeing here... 
chicken and the
egg, or rather, the driver and the market.  Without a proper driver, there
won't be a market for this card to be used with FreeBSD.  However, without
the manufacturer seeing visability in this market, there won't be a driver
as it would be a waste of their developers time.


This is the truth for commercial projects.  Open Source drivers, on the
other hand, operate somewhat differently.

Ted Mittelstaedt   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author of:   The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide

contigmalloc + contigfree = memory leak?

2001-10-15 Thread Eugene M. Kim

Greetings,

QUESTION:
Does contigfree() really free up memory allocated using contigmalloc()?

BACKGROUND:
I've been trying to make up a kmod that allocates/deallocates memory in
a specific physical address range.  Mike Smith suggested using busdma
functions to do the job, so I followed it.

After allocating and deallocating memory several times, it seemed that
bus_dmamem_free() was not freeing the memory properly.  I looked at
busdma_machdep.c where bus_dmamem_free() was defined, and found:

void
bus_dmamem_free(bus_dma_tag_t dmat, void *vaddr, bus_dmamap_t map)
{
/*
 * dmamem does not need to be bounced, so the map should be
 * NULL
 */
if (map != NULL)
panic(bus_dmamem_free: Invalid map freed\n);
/* XXX There is no contigfree and free doesn't work */
if ((dmat-maxsize = PAGE_SIZE)  dmat-lowaddr = ptoa(Maxmem))
free(vaddr, M_DEVBUF);
}

However, there *is* contigfree() and a related patch was applied on
-current around August, so I did the same thing (adding an else clause
to call contigfree(vaddr, dmat-maxsize, M_DEVBUF)).

It didn't solve the memory leak problem either, so I'm stuck here...

Could anyone shed a light on this?

Regards,
Eugene

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



Re: contigmalloc + contigfree = memory leak?

2001-10-15 Thread Eugene M. Kim

Oops, I'm sorry for the self-reply.  Just found a highly helpful thread
posted from 11th (`contigfree, free what?'), so please disregard my
message.

/me bonks his head against a wall that says `mea culpa'

Thanks,
Eugene

On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 02:42:17PM +0900, Eugene M. Kim wrote:
 
 
 Greetings,
 
 QUESTION:
 Does contigfree() really free up memory allocated using contigmalloc()?
 
 BACKGROUND:
 I've been trying to make up a kmod that allocates/deallocates memory in
 a specific physical address range.  Mike Smith suggested using busdma
 functions to do the job, so I followed it.
 
 After allocating and deallocating memory several times, it seemed that
 bus_dmamem_free() was not freeing the memory properly.  I looked at
 busdma_machdep.c where bus_dmamem_free() was defined, and found:
 
 void
 bus_dmamem_free(bus_dma_tag_t dmat, void *vaddr, bus_dmamap_t map)
 {
 /*
  * dmamem does not need to be bounced, so the map should be
  * NULL
  */
 if (map != NULL)
 panic(bus_dmamem_free: Invalid map freed\n);
 /* XXX There is no contigfree and free doesn't work */
 if ((dmat-maxsize = PAGE_SIZE)  dmat-lowaddr = ptoa(Maxmem))
 free(vaddr, M_DEVBUF);
 }
 
 However, there *is* contigfree() and a related patch was applied on
 -current around August, so I did the same thing (adding an else clause
 to call contigfree(vaddr, dmat-maxsize, M_DEVBUF)).
 
 It didn't solve the memory leak problem either, so I'm stuck here...
 
 Could anyone shed a light on this?
 
 Regards,
 Eugene
 
 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message

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