disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
I know for UPDATING, it s not correct way, but i tried and 8.2 system works with 8.3 kernel (copied 8.3 /boot/kernel directory to freebsd 8.2 /boot/kernel) and it s not good solution but i want to know; - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? - What are user land tools those not match with 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system...? best regards, -- http://www.siyahsapka.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 02:06:35PM +0200, Ali Okan YÜKSEL wrote: I know for UPDATING, it s not correct way, but i tried and 8.2 system works with 8.3 kernel (copied 8.3 /boot/kernel directory to freebsd 8.2 /boot/kernel) and it s not good solution but i want to know; - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? - What are user land tools those not match with 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system...? Because of ... things I'd really rather not even think about, let alone consider discussing ... there are ceratin machines at $work that are thus configured. (Yes, I'm working on repairing this self-inflicted wound.) The only issue of which I'm aware is that if one wishes to use mfiutil(8), it better be one that was built from 8.3 source; an 8.2 mfiutil run on an 8.3 kernel will panic the box consistently. Peace, david -- David H. Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org Taliban: Evil men with guns afraid of truth from a 14-year old girl. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. pgp5XwLJxt2NR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
- What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? no idea. just get latest -8 sources, compile world and kernel and install. all newest and in sync. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IBM blade server abysmal disk write performances
Note that the driver says Command Queueing enabled without specifying which. If the driver is trying to use SATA's NCQ but the drive only speaks SCSI's TCQ, that could explain it. Or if the TCQ isn't working for some other reason. even without TCQ,NCQ and write cache the write speed is really terrible. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: off topic but no idea where to ask
from first local disk at 0x07c00 and booting as with normal hard drive. instead of pxeboot, try giving /boot/boot0 works, except of delay. fixed from sources for 1s delay :) ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Failsafe on kernel panic
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 08:38 +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: btw: i don't see any options in my kernel config for KBD / Unatteneded , th eonly thing that mention its is: device ukbd Sami I think if you don't have any kdb options turned on, then a panic should automatically store a crashdump to swap, then reboot the machine. If that's not working, perhaps it locks up trying to store the dump? If the hardware has a watchdog timer, enabling that might be the best way to ensure a reboot on any kind of crash or hang. -- Ian On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Sami Halabi sodyn...@gmail.com wrote: Its only a kernel option? There is no flag to pass to the loader? SAMI 17 2013 05:18, Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org: On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:27 +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: Thank you for your response, very helpful. one question - how do i configure auto-reboot once kernel panic occurs? Sami From src/sys/conf/NOTES, this may be what you're looking for... # # Don't enter the debugger for a panic. Intended for unattended operation # where you may want to enter the debugger from the console, but still want # the machine to recover from a panic. # options KDB_UNATTENDED But I think it only has meaning if you have option KDB in effect, otherwise it should just reboot itself after a 15 second pause. -- Ian On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:13 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 2:25:33 pm Sami Halabi wrote: Hi everyone, I have a production box, in which I want to install new kernel without any remotd kvn. my problem is its 2 hours away, and if a kernel panic occurs I got a problem. I woner if I can seg failsafe script to load the old kernel in case of psnic. man nextboot (if you are using UFS) -- John Baldwin -- Sami Halabi Information Systems Engineer NMS Projects Expert FreeBSD SysAdmin Expert ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Failsafe on kernel panic
Hi, Upon panic no auto restart occurs. How do I know/activate these watchdogs? Sami בתאריך 17 בינו 2013 15:35, מאת Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org: On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 08:38 +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: btw: i don't see any options in my kernel config for KBD / Unatteneded , th eonly thing that mention its is: device ukbd Sami I think if you don't have any kdb options turned on, then a panic should automatically store a crashdump to swap, then reboot the machine. If that's not working, perhaps it locks up trying to store the dump? If the hardware has a watchdog timer, enabling that might be the best way to ensure a reboot on any kind of crash or hang. -- Ian On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Sami Halabi sodyn...@gmail.com wrote: Its only a kernel option? There is no flag to pass to the loader? SAMI 17 2013 05:18, Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org: On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:27 +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: Thank you for your response, very helpful. one question - how do i configure auto-reboot once kernel panic occurs? Sami From src/sys/conf/NOTES, this may be what you're looking for... # # Don't enter the debugger for a panic. Intended for unattended operation # where you may want to enter the debugger from the console, but still want # the machine to recover from a panic. # options KDB_UNATTENDED But I think it only has meaning if you have option KDB in effect, otherwise it should just reboot itself after a 15 second pause. -- Ian On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:13 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 2:25:33 pm Sami Halabi wrote: Hi everyone, I have a production box, in which I want to install new kernel without any remotd kvn. my problem is its 2 hours away, and if a kernel panic occurs I got a problem. I woner if I can seg failsafe script to load the old kernel in case of psnic. man nextboot (if you are using UFS) -- John Baldwin -- Sami Halabi Information Systems Engineer NMS Projects Expert FreeBSD SysAdmin Expert ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: off topic but no idea where to ask
from first local disk at 0x07c00 and booting as with normal hard drive. instead of pxeboot, try giving /boot/boot0 works, except of delay. fixed from sources for 1s delay :) may the source be with you :-) btw, the above works for MBR, if you use GPT then you should use pmbr. danny ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On 17 Jan 2013 12:43, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? no idea. just get latest -8 sources, compile world and kernel and install. all newest and in sync. I agree; very weird problems sometimes happen with out of sync kernel/world; normally with new world old kernel, but the opposite is possible. Are you simply apprehensive over the time of buildworld? Chris ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:06 AM, Ali Okan YÜKSEL wrote: I know for UPDATING, it s not correct way, but i tried and 8.2 system works with 8.3 kernel (copied 8.3 /boot/kernel directory to freebsd 8.2 /boot/kernel) and it s not good solution but i want to know; - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? A couple user land tools might barf on you (listed below). Other than that, it's generally considered very safe. The quintessential test-case is running an 8.2 jail under an 8.3 host. We do this all the time with various releases (again, most-problematic utilities listed below). - What are user land tools those not match with 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system…? top and ps might complain about procsize mismatch. netstat has been known to have problems if the gap is too wide. That's about all that I can think off the top of my head. The quick solution is to just grab the 8.3-R copies of top, ps, and netstat *IFF* they cause problems (e.g., ps immediately dies with procsize mismatch error). -- Devin P.S. Been doing this kind of mismatching of kernel/userland for YEARS (all the way back to 4.4/4.8) and top and ps always prove to be problematic. _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Failsafe on kernel panic
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 04:14:21PM +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: Hi, Upon panic no auto restart occurs. How do I know/activate these watchdogs? Sami You can try starting watchdogd with 'service watchdogd onestart', and have it automatically start during boot by adding 'watchdogd_enable=YES' to rc.conf. You can test by starting watchdogd and sending SIGKILL to it - if everything's working properly, the system should reboot after the timeout period (16s by default). If you don't have a hardware watchdog (or have one that isn't supported by any drivers), watchdogd will fail to start. -Mark בתאריך 17 בינו 2013 15:35, מאת Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org: On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 08:38 +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: btw: i don't see any options in my kernel config for KBD / Unatteneded , th eonly thing that mention its is: device ukbd Sami I think if you don't have any kdb options turned on, then a panic should automatically store a crashdump to swap, then reboot the machine. If that's not working, perhaps it locks up trying to store the dump? If the hardware has a watchdog timer, enabling that might be the best way to ensure a reboot on any kind of crash or hang. -- Ian On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Sami Halabi sodyn...@gmail.com wrote: Its only a kernel option? There is no flag to pass to the loader? SAMI 17 2013 05:18, Ian Lepore i...@freebsd.org: On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 23:27 +0200, Sami Halabi wrote: Thank you for your response, very helpful. one question - how do i configure auto-reboot once kernel panic occurs? Sami From src/sys/conf/NOTES, this may be what you're looking for... # # Don't enter the debugger for a panic. Intended for unattended operation # where you may want to enter the debugger from the console, but still want # the machine to recover from a panic. # options KDB_UNATTENDED But I think it only has meaning if you have option KDB in effect, otherwise it should just reboot itself after a 15 second pause. -- Ian On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:13 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 2:25:33 pm Sami Halabi wrote: Hi everyone, I have a production box, in which I want to install new kernel without any remotd kvn. my problem is its 2 hours away, and if a kernel panic occurs I got a problem. I woner if I can seg failsafe script to load the old kernel in case of psnic. man nextboot (if you are using UFS) -- John Baldwin -- Sami Halabi Information Systems Engineer NMS Projects Expert FreeBSD SysAdmin Expert ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
Are you simply apprehensive over the time of buildworld? no idea what you mean - my english isn't perfect. I normally have latest binaries and generic kernel built for FreeBSD 8 which i use on servers (don't upgrade now as it works and there is no need to). I have .tar.gz file with binaries, and compile custom kernel on given machine but with same sys sources. so all always in sync. I once had strange out of sync problems - but with virtualbox kernel module. recompiling this module solved all of them. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On 17 Jan 2013 17:13, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: Are you simply apprehensive over the time of buildworld? no idea what you mean - my english isn't perfect. Sorry, was asking the OP. I normally have latest binaries and generic kernel built for FreeBSD 8 which i use on servers (don't upgrade now as it works and there is no need to). I have .tar.gz file with binaries, and compile custom kernel on given machine but with same sys sources. so all always in sync. I once had strange out of sync problems - but with virtualbox kernel module. recompiling this module solved all of them. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: off topic but no idea where to ask
may the source be with you :-) btw, the above works for MBR, if you use GPT then you should use pmbr. they are windoze workstations only. and with FreeBSD i too don't have to use GPT strangeness fortunately. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:57:01 am Devin Teske wrote: On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:06 AM, Ali Okan YÜKSEL wrote: I know for UPDATING, it s not correct way, but i tried and 8.2 system works with 8.3 kernel (copied 8.3 /boot/kernel directory to freebsd 8.2 /boot/kernel) and it s not good solution but i want to know; - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? A couple user land tools might barf on you (listed below). Other than that, it's generally considered very safe. The quintessential test-case is running an 8.2 jail under an 8.3 host. We do this all the time with various releases (again, most-problematic utilities listed below). - What are user land tools those not match with 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system…? top and ps might complain about procsize mismatch. netstat has been known to have problems if the gap is too wide. These generally do not have problems in recent release branches. top and ps haven't complained about procsize since the 4.x days as 5.0 introduced a new kinfo_proc structure that the kernel exports and it hasn't changed in size since 5.0. The mfiutil issue dhw@ mentioned is real and is due to an mfi(4) driver change. I merged a fix for the panics to 8-stable, but it just makes old mfiutil binaries not work at all. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Failsafe on kernel panic
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:27:53 pm Sami Halabi wrote: Thank you for your response, very helpful. one question - how do i configure auto-reboot once kernel panic occurs? Unless you've added DDB and KDB to your kernel it will reboot by default on a panic. Stable kernel configs also include the unattended option so that even with the debugger present they reboot by default on a panic. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
stupid UFS behaviour on random writes
create 10GB file (on 2GB RAM machine, with some swap used to make sure little cache would be available for filesystem. dd if=/dev/zero of=file bs=1m count=10k block size is 32KB, fragment size 4k now test random read access to it (10 threads) randomio test 10 0 0 4096 normal result on such not so fast disk in my laptop. 118.5 | 118.5 5.8 82.3 383.2 85.6 |0.0 infnan0.0nan 138.4 | 138.4 3.9 72.2 499.7 76.1 |0.0 infnan0.0nan 142.9 | 142.9 5.4 69.9 297.7 60.9 |0.0 infnan0.0nan 133.9 | 133.9 4.3 74.1 480.1 75.1 |0.0 infnan0.0nan 138.4 | 138.4 5.1 72.1 380.0 71.3 |0.0 infnan0.0nan 145.9 | 145.9 4.7 68.8 419.3 69.6 |0.0 infnan0.0nan systat shows 4kB I/O size. all is fine. BUT random 4kB writes randomio test 10 1 0 4096 total | read: latency (ms) | write:latency (ms) iops | iops minavgmax sdev | iops minavgmax sdev +---+-- 38.5 |0.0 infnan0.0nan | 38.5 9.0 166.5 1156.8 261.5 44.0 |0.0 infnan0.0nan | 44.0 0.1 251.2 2616.7 492.7 44.0 |0.0 infnan0.0nan | 44.0 7.6 178.3 1895.4 330.0 45.0 |0.0 infnan0.0nan | 45.0 0.0 239.8 3457.4 522.3 45.5 |0.0 infnan0.0nan | 45.5 0.1 249.8 5126.7 621.0 results are horrific. systat shows 32kB I/O, gstat shows half are reads half are writes. Why UFS need to read full block, change one 4kB part and then write back, instead of just writing 4kB part? ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On Jan 17, 2013, at 8:03 AM, John Baldwin wrote: On Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:57:01 am Devin Teske wrote: On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:06 AM, Ali Okan YÜKSEL wrote: I know for UPDATING, it s not correct way, but i tried and 8.2 system works with 8.3 kernel (copied 8.3 /boot/kernel directory to freebsd 8.2 /boot/kernel) and it s not good solution but i want to know; - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2? A couple user land tools might barf on you (listed below). Other than that, it's generally considered very safe. The quintessential test-case is running an 8.2 jail under an 8.3 host. We do this all the time with various releases (again, most-problematic utilities listed below). - What are user land tools those not match with 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system…? top and ps might complain about procsize mismatch. netstat has been known to have problems if the gap is too wide. These generally do not have problems in recent release branches. top and ps haven't complained about procsize since the 4.x days as 5.0 introduced a new kinfo_proc structure that the kernel exports and it hasn't changed in size since 5.0. The mfiutil issue dhw@ mentioned is real and is due to an mfi(4) driver change. I merged a fix for the panics to 8-stable, but it just makes old mfiutil binaries not work at all. You're the perfect person to help us figure out why when we: 1. back-port mfi(4) from stable/8 into releng/8.3 (8.3-RELEASE-p5 at the time of back-port) 2. Succeed in getting 8.3 to boot on Thunderbolt card 3. mfiutil produces Inappropriate ioctl for device Even after… 4. Recompiling mfiutil from stable/8 (albeit in a releng/8.3 build environment -- back ported headers applied for new macros even) Any hints on where to go next to restore mfiutil access? -- Devin _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
- Original Message - From: Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com You're the perfect person to help us figure out why when we: 1. back-port mfi(4) from stable/8 into releng/8.3 (8.3-RELEASE-p5 at the time of back-port) 2. Succeed in getting 8.3 to boot on Thunderbolt card 3. mfiutil produces Inappropriate ioctl for device Even after… 4. Recompiling mfiutil from stable/8 (albeit in a releng/8.3 build environment -- back ported headers applied for new macros even) Any hints on where to go next to restore mfiutil access? You also need to backport mfiutil too. I have a patch set for 8.3 which include latest mfi driver, mfiutil and a large set of mfi driver fixes, even head has some rather serious issues although mainly around error handling on tbolt cards. We're running this in production so believe its a good stable set. If you would like the patch set just let me know. Regards Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to postmas...@multiplay.co.uk. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Steven Hartland wrote: - Original Message - From: Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com You're the perfect person to help us figure out why when we: 1. back-port mfi(4) from stable/8 into releng/8.3 (8.3-RELEASE-p5 at the time of back-port) 2. Succeed in getting 8.3 to boot on Thunderbolt card 3. mfiutil produces Inappropriate ioctl for device Even after… 4. Recompiling mfiutil from stable/8 (albeit in a releng/8.3 build environment -- back ported headers applied for new macros even) Any hints on where to go next to restore mfiutil access? You also need to backport mfiutil too. I have a patch set for 8.3 which include latest mfi driver, mfiutil and a large set of mfi driver fixes, even head has some rather serious issues although mainly around error handling on tbolt cards. We're running this in production so believe its a good stable set. If you would like the patch set just let me know. I can't resist when you combine words like production and 8.3 (smiles) I'm definitely interested in the patch. Can you send it our way, please? -- Devin _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
On 17 Jan 2013, at 20:27, Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com wrote: On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Steven Hartland wrote: - Original Message - From: Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com You're the perfect person to help us figure out why when we: 1. back-port mfi(4) from stable/8 into releng/8.3 (8.3-RELEASE-p5 at the time of back-port) 2. Succeed in getting 8.3 to boot on Thunderbolt card 3. mfiutil produces Inappropriate ioctl for device Even after… 4. Recompiling mfiutil from stable/8 (albeit in a releng/8.3 build environment -- back ported headers applied for new macros even) Any hints on where to go next to restore mfiutil access? You also need to backport mfiutil too. I have a patch set for 8.3 which include latest mfi driver, mfiutil and a large set of mfi driver fixes, even head has some rather serious issues although mainly around error handling on tbolt cards. We're running this in production so believe its a good stable set. If you would like the patch set just let me know. I can't resist when you combine words like production and 8.3 (smiles) ? Are you saying 8.3 isn't production worthy ? Works like a charm here for us. 50+ boxes running 8.x, most of which are 8-stable. No offence meant, but I'd take 8.3 over 9.x any day. Any night too, for that matter. YMMV but PF + pfsync + carp (and some boxes with nginx or relayd on top) is pretty good for our workload on 8.3. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: stupid UFS behaviour on random writes
Wojciech Puchar wrote: create 10GB file (on 2GB RAM machine, with some swap used to make sure little cache would be available for filesystem. dd if=/dev/zero of=file bs=1m count=10k block size is 32KB, fragment size 4k now test random read access to it (10 threads) randomio test 10 0 0 4096 normal result on such not so fast disk in my laptop. 118.5 | 118.5 5.8 82.3 383.2 85.6 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan 138.4 | 138.4 3.9 72.2 499.7 76.1 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan 142.9 | 142.9 5.4 69.9 297.7 60.9 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan 133.9 | 133.9 4.3 74.1 480.1 75.1 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan 138.4 | 138.4 5.1 72.1 380.0 71.3 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan 145.9 | 145.9 4.7 68.8 419.3 69.6 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan systat shows 4kB I/O size. all is fine. BUT random 4kB writes randomio test 10 1 0 4096 total | read: latency (ms) | write: latency (ms) iops | iops min avg max sdev | iops min avg max sdev +---+-- 38.5 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan | 38.5 9.0 166.5 1156.8 261.5 44.0 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan | 44.0 0.1 251.2 2616.7 492.7 44.0 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan | 44.0 7.6 178.3 1895.4 330.0 45.0 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan | 45.0 0.0 239.8 3457.4 522.3 45.5 | 0.0 inf nan 0.0 nan | 45.5 0.1 249.8 5126.7 621.0 results are horrific. systat shows 32kB I/O, gstat shows half are reads half are writes. Why UFS need to read full block, change one 4kB part and then write back, instead of just writing 4kB part? Because that's the way the buffer cache works. It writes an entire buffer cache block (unless at the end of file), so it must read the rest of the block into the buffer, so it doesn't write garbage (the rest of the block) out. I'd argue that using an I/O size smaller than the file system block size is simply sub-optimal and that most apps. don't do random I/O of blocks. OR If you had an app. that does random I/O of 4K blocks (at 4K byte offsets), then using a 4K/1K file system would be better. NFS is the exception, in that it keeps track of a dirty byte range within a buffer cache block and writes that byte range. (NFS writes are byte granular, unlike a disk.) ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: stupid UFS behaviour on random writes
I'd argue that using an I/O size smaller than the file system block size is simply sub-optimal and that most apps. don't do random I/O of blocks. OR If you had an app. that does random I/O of 4K blocks (at 4K byte offsets), then using a 4K/1K file system would be better. i can just use raw partition but it isn't about the question. For me it is just clearly suboptimal behavior, but if it cannot be fixed then fine. The case is when you store VM images on filesystem and virtual machine issues writes. Quite common case. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IBM blade server abysmal disk write performances
On 16/01/2013 2:48 AM, Dieter BSD wrote: Karim writes: It is quite obvious that something is awfully slow on SAS drives, whatever it is and regardless of OS comparison. We swapped the SAS drives for SATA and we're seeing much higher speeds. Basically on par with what we were expecting (roughly 300 to 400 times faster then what we see with SAS...). Major clue there! According to wikipedia: Most SAS drives provide tagged command queuing, while most newer SATA drives provide native command queuing [1] Note that the driver says Command Queueing enabled without specifying which. If the driver is trying to use SATA's NCQ but the drive only speaks SCSI's TCQ, that could explain it. Or if the TCQ isn't working for some other reason. See if there are any error messages in dmesg or /var/log. If not, perhaps the driver has extra debugging you could turn on. Get TCQ working and make sure your partitions are aligned on 4 KiB boundaries (in case the drive actually has 4 KiB sectors), and you should get the expected performance. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_attached_SCSI Thanks for the wiki article reference it is very interesting and confirms our current setup. I'm mostly thinking about this line: SAS controllers may connect to SATA devices, either directly connected using native SATA protocol or through SAS expanders using SATA Tunneled Protocol (STP). The systems is currently put in place using SATA instead of SAS although its using the same interface and backplane connectors and the drives (SATA) show as da0 in BSD _but_ with the SATA drive we get *much* better performances. I am thinking that something fancy in that SAS drive is not being handled correctly by the FreeBSD driver. I am planning to revisit the SAS drive issue at a later point (sometimes next week). Here is some trimmed and hopefully relevant information (from dmesg): SAS drive: mpt0: LSILogic SAS/SATA Adapter port 0x1000-0x10ff mem 0x9991-0x99913fff,0x9990-0x9990 irq 28 at device 0.0 on pci11 mpt0: MPI Version=1.5.20.0 mpt0: Capabilities: ( RAID-0 RAID-1E RAID-1 ) mpt0: 0 Active Volumes (2 Max) mpt0: 0 Hidden Drive Members (14 Max) ... da0 at mpt0 bus 0 scbus0 target 1 lun 0 da0: IBM-ESXS HUC106030CSS60 D3A6 Fixed Direct Access SCSI-6 device da0: 300.000MB/s transfers da0: Command Queueing enabled da0: 286102MB (585937500 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 36472C) ... GEOM: da0: the primary GPT table is corrupt or invalid. GEOM: da0: using the secondary instead -- recovery strongly advised. SATA drive: mpt0: LSILogic SAS/SATA Adapter port 0x1000-0x10ff mem 0x9b91-0x9b913fff,0x9b90-0x9b90 irq 28 at device 0.0 on pci11 mpt0: MPI Version=1.5.20.0 mpt0: Capabilities: ( RAID-0 RAID-1E RAID-1 ) mpt0: 0 Active Volumes (2 Max) mpt0: 0 Hidden Drive Members (14 Max) ... da0 at mpt0 bus 0 scbus0 target 2 lun 0 da0: ATA ST91000640NS SN03 Fixed Direct Access SCSI-5 device da0: 300.000MB/s transfers da0: Command Queueing enabled da0: 953869MB (1953525168 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 121601C) ... GEOM: da0s1: geometry does not match label (16h,63s != 255h,63s). Please let me know if there is anything you would like me to run on the BSD 9.1 system to help diagnose this issue? Thank you, Karim. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
-Original Message- From: Damien Fleuriot [mailto:m...@my.gd] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 2:54 PM To: Devin Teske Cc: Steven Hartland; freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Devin Teske; Ali Okan YÜKSEL Subject: Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system On 17 Jan 2013, at 20:27, Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com wrote: On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:14 AM, Steven Hartland wrote: - Original Message - From: Devin Teske devin.te...@fisglobal.com You're the perfect person to help us figure out why when we: 1. back-port mfi(4) from stable/8 into releng/8.3 (8.3-RELEASE-p5 at the time of back-port) 2. Succeed in getting 8.3 to boot on Thunderbolt card 3. mfiutil produces Inappropriate ioctl for device Even after… 4. Recompiling mfiutil from stable/8 (albeit in a releng/8.3 build environment -- back ported headers applied for new macros even) Any hints on where to go next to restore mfiutil access? You also need to backport mfiutil too. I have a patch set for 8.3 which include latest mfi driver, mfiutil and a large set of mfi driver fixes, even head has some rather serious issues although mainly around error handling on tbolt cards. We're running this in production so believe its a good stable set. If you would like the patch set just let me know. I can't resist when you combine words like production and 8.3 (smiles) ? Are you saying 8.3 isn't production worthy ? With the right hardware, yes, that's what we're experiencing with latent hardware that we've been tasked with benchmarking. Works like a charm here for us. 50+ boxes running 8.x, most of which are 8-stable. But I bet you're not sitting 88 units of Thunderbolt cards that don't work in 8.3. 8.3 is also exhibiting major problems with the igb-based NICs on those same 88 units. No offence meant, but I'd take 8.3 over 9.x any day. Any night too, for that matter. (smiles) YMMV but PF + pfsync + carp (and some boxes with nginx or relayd on top) is pretty good for our workload on 8.3. I do indeed appreciate the vote of confidence. The hope is that when we get through our mfi and igb problems that 8.3 will be a slammin' victory on this hardware (but until then, we're fighting the good fight). -- Devin _ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system
- Original Message -
From: dte...@freebsd.org
But I bet you're not sitting 88 units of Thunderbolt cards that don't work in
8.3.
8.3 is also exhibiting major problems with the igb-based NICs on those same 88
units.
Only effects igb init but might want to make sure you have r245334 back ported
to
avoid memory leaks when mbuf clusters are exhausted.
8.3 version of the patch attached ;-)
For reference not only does this prevent the nic initialising properly it can
also hang
the boot process as when routing initialises route appears to trigger mbuf
allocation
with wait and as mbufs are exhaused and not freed correctly this hangs forever.
This will happen on an untuned kernel if more than 2 igb nics are configured as
each igb requires 8k of mbuf clusters (1k per queue x 8 queues on a machine with
8 or more cores) and the default kern.ipc.nmbclusters is only 25600.
For clarity by configured I mean if the nic is initialised either by
assigning an IP
or ifconfig igbX up the queues are not allocated if the nic is present but
unused.
Regards
Steve
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it.
In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please
telephone +44 845 868 1337
or return the E.mail to postmas...@multiplay.co.uk.
Fixed mbuf free when receive structures fail to allocate.
This prevents quad igb card on high core machines, without any nmbcluster or
igb queue tuning wedging the boot process if all nics are configured.
--- sys/dev/e1000/if_igb.c.orig 2013-01-10 21:44:03.017805977 +
+++ sys/dev/e1000/if_igb.c 2013-01-10 21:44:55.751355018 +
@@ -4335,8 +4335,8 @@
* the rings that completed, the failing case will have
* cleaned up for itself. 'i' is the endpoint.
*/
- for (int j = 0; j i; ++j) {
- rxr = adapter-rx_rings[i];
+ for (int j = 0; j i; ++j) {
+ rxr = adapter-rx_rings[j];
IGB_RX_LOCK(rxr);
igb_free_receive_ring(rxr);
IGB_RX_UNLOCK(rxr);
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Fixing grep -D skip
I am trying to fix a bug in GNU grep, the bug is if you want to skip FIFO file, it will not work, for example: grep -D skip aaa . it will be stucked on a FIFO file. Here is the patch: http://people.freebsd.org/~davidxu/patch/grep.c.diff2 Is it fine to be committed ? Regards, David Xu ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IBM blade server abysmal disk write performances
I am thinking that something fancy in that SAS drive is not being handled correctly by the FreeBSD driver. I think so too, and I think the something fancy is tagged command queuing. The driver prints da0: Command Queueing enabled and yet your SAS drive is only getting 1 write per rev, and queuing should get you more than that. Your SATA drive is getting the expected performance, which means that NCQ must be working. Please let me know if there is anything you would like me to run on the BSD 9.1 system to help diagnose this issue? Looking at the mpt driver, a verbose boot may give more info. Looks like you can set a debug device hint, but I don't see any documentation on what to set it to. I think it is time to ask the driver wizards why TCQ isn't working, so I'm cc-ing the authors listed on the mpt man page. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IBM blade server abysmal disk write performances
When you run gstat, how many ops/sec are you seeing? Adrian On 17 January 2013 20:03, Dieter BSD dieter...@gmail.com wrote: I am thinking that something fancy in that SAS drive is not being handled correctly by the FreeBSD driver. I think so too, and I think the something fancy is tagged command queuing. The driver prints da0: Command Queueing enabled and yet your SAS drive is only getting 1 write per rev, and queuing should get you more than that. Your SATA drive is getting the expected performance, which means that NCQ must be working. Please let me know if there is anything you would like me to run on the BSD 9.1 system to help diagnose this issue? Looking at the mpt driver, a verbose boot may give more info. Looks like you can set a debug device hint, but I don't see any documentation on what to set it to. I think it is time to ask the driver wizards why TCQ isn't working, so I'm cc-ing the authors listed on the mpt man page. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IBM blade server abysmal disk write performances
On 1/17/2013 8:03 PM, Dieter BSD wrote: I think it is time to ask the driver wizards why TCQ isn't working, so I'm cc-ing the authors listed on the mpt man page. It is the MPT firmware that implements SATL, but there are probably tweaks that the FreeBSD driver doesn't do that the Linux driver does do. The MPT driver was also worked on years ago and for a variety of reasons is unloved. In general ATA drives have caching enabled, and in fact it is difficult to turn off. There is no info in the email trail that says what the state of the SAS drive is wrt cache enable. There is also no information in the original email as to which direction the I/O was being sent. Let's also get a grip about linux vs. freebsd- using 'dd' is not necessarily and apple-apple comparison where writes are concerned because of the linux heavy write behind policy (plugging I/Os until it gets a large xfer built up and then releasing, which gets larger xfers, while freebsd will use the blocksize you tell it to (whether that's optimal or not). I'll see if I can generate some A/B numbers using fio here and report back. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
