Re: Heads up: New C++ stack

2011-12-18 Thread Jan Beich
David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org writes: [...] libcxxrt and libc++ are now in contrib and building with the base system, but are not used by anything (and are only built if you set WITH_LIBCPLUSPLUS=yes when building world, not by default). If you want to test some code with the new

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Alexander Best
On Sun Dec 18 11, Andrey Chernov wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 05:51:47PM +1100, Ian Smith wrote: On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 02:37:52 +, Bruce Cran wrote: On 13/12/2011 09:00, Andrey Chernov wrote: I observe ULE interactivity slowness even on single core machine (Pentium 4) in

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Alexander Best
On Sun Dec 18 11, Alexander Best wrote: On Sun Dec 18 11, Andrey Chernov wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 05:51:47PM +1100, Ian Smith wrote: On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 02:37:52 +, Bruce Cran wrote: On 13/12/2011 09:00, Andrey Chernov wrote: I observe ULE interactivity slowness even on

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Bruce Cran
On 18/12/2011 10:34, Adrian Chadd wrote: I applaud reppie for trying to make it as easy as possible for people to use KTR to provide scheduler traces for him to go digging with, so please, if you have these issues and you can absolutely reproduce them, please follow his instructions and work

Re: Sleeping thread (tid 100033, pid 16): panic in FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT/amd64 r228662

2011-12-18 Thread O. Hartmann
On 12/18/11 02:45, Alexander Kabaev wrote: On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 01:09:00 +0100 O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: Sleeping thread (tid 100033, pid 16) owns a non sleepable lock panic: sleeping thread cpuid = 0 PID 16 is always USB on my box. You really need to give us a

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread O. Hartmann
On 12/18/11 03:37, Bruce Cran wrote: On 13/12/2011 09:00, Andrey Chernov wrote: I observe ULE interactivity slowness even on single core machine (Pentium 4) in very visible places, like 'ps ax' output stucks in the middle by ~1 second. When I switch back to SHED_4BSD, all slowness is gone.

[head tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64

2011-12-18 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2011-12-18 15:26:46 - tinderbox 2.8 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2011-12-18 15:26:46 - starting HEAD tinderbox run for sparc64/sparc64 TB --- 2011-12-18 15:26:46 - cleaning the object tree TB --- 2011-12-18 15:26:57 - cvsupping the source tree TB --- 2011-12-18 15:26:57 -

Re: svn commit: r228576 - in head: . sys/boot/forth sys/modules sys/modules/carp sys/modules/if_carp

2011-12-18 Thread Gleb Smirnoff
Alexander, On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 03:08:43PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: A we never had a kernel part in the list. Reinstallkernel is not a valid target after updating the sources. The renaming will only take effekt after updating. And we already hat issues because the list was too

Re: [head tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64

2011-12-18 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
FreeBSD Tinderbox tinder...@freebsd.org writes: In file included from /src/sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c:400: /src/sys/dev/netmap/if_em_netmap.h: In function 'em_netmap_rxsync': /src/sys/dev/netmap/if_em_netmap.h:332: warning: dereferencing 'void *' pointer /src/sys/dev/netmap/if_em_netmap.h:332:

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Adrian Chadd
Hi, What Attilllo and others need are KTR traces in the most stripped down example of interactive-busting workload you can find. Eg: if you're doing 32 concurrent buildworlds and trying to test interactivity - fine, but that's going to result in a lot of KTR stuff. If you can reproduce it using

openpam oddity?

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Butler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Any ideas why courier-authdaemon is now reporting .. authdaemond: in openpam_dynamic(): No error: 0 authdaemond: in openpam_load_module(): no pam_unix.so found I've recompiled libpam and courier from scratch :-( imb -BEGIN PGP

Re: openpam oddity?

2011-12-18 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Michael Butler i...@protected-networks.net wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Any ideas why courier-authdaemon is now reporting .. authdaemond: in openpam_dynamic(): No error: 0 authdaemond: in openpam_load_module(): no pam_unix.so found

Re: openpam oddity?

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Butler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/18/11 15:20, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Michael Butler i...@protected-networks.net wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Any ideas why courier-authdaemon is now reporting .. authdaemond: in

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Bruce Evans
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Ivan Klymenko wrote: ?? Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:04:42 +0100 Jilles Tjoelker jil...@stack.nl ??: On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:40:48AM +0200, Ivan Klymenko wrote: If the algorithm ULE does not contain problems - it means the problem has Core2Duo, or in a piece of code

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Ross
Am 15.12.2011, 11:10 Uhr, schrieb Michael Larabel michael.lara...@phoronix.com: On 12/15/2011 02:48 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Anyway these tests were performed on different hardware, FWIW. And with different filesystems, different compilers, different GUIs... No, the same hardware was

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Larabel
On 12/15/2011 04:41 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Am 15.12.2011, 11:10 Uhr, schrieb Michael Larabel michael.lara...@phoronix.com: On 12/15/2011 02:48 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Anyway these tests were performed on different hardware, FWIW. And with different filesystems, different compilers,

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Ross
Am 15.12.2011, 11:55 Uhr, schrieb Michael Larabel michael.lara...@phoronix.com: On 12/15/2011 04:41 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Am 15.12.2011, 11:10 Uhr, schrieb Michael Larabel michael.lara...@phoronix.com: On 12/15/2011 02:48 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Anyway these tests were performed on

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Hi, all, Am 15.12.2011 um 12:18 schrieb Michael Ross: Following Steven Hartlands' suggestion, from one of my machines: /usr/ports/sysutils/dmidecode/#sysctl -a | egrep hw.vendor|hw.product /usr/ports/sysutils/dmidecode/#dmidecode -t 2 # dmidecode 2.11 SMBIOS 2.6 present. Handle

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 04:55:16AM -0600, Michael Larabel wrote: On 12/15/2011 04:41 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Am 15.12.2011, 11:10 Uhr, schrieb Michael Larabel michael.lara...@phoronix.com: On 12/15/2011 02:48 AM, Michael Ross wrote: Anyway these tests were performed on different hardware,

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 05:32:47AM -0700, Samuel J. Greear wrote: Well, the only way it's going to get fixed is if someone sits down, replicates it, and starts to document exactly what it is that these benchmarks are/aren't doing. I think you will find that investigation is largely a

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Larabel
On 12/15/2011 08:26 AM, Sergey Matveychuk wrote: 15.12.2011 17:36, Michael Larabel пишет: On 12/15/2011 07:25 AM, Stefan Esser wrote: Am 15.12.2011 11:10, schrieb Michael Larabel: No, the same hardware was used for each OS. In terms of the software, the stock software stack for each OS was

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Randy Schultz
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Pieter de Goeje spaketh thusly: -}Detailed results here: -}http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1112113-AR-ORACLELIN37 LOL! Pretty much 2 entirely different systems, even running different screen resolutions. Tnx for this link. -} -}As usual, the phoronix benchmarks are

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Samuel J. Greear
Well, the only way it's going to get fixed is if someone sits down, replicates it, and starts to document exactly what it is that these benchmarks are/aren't doing. I think you will find that investigation is largely a waste of time, because not only are some of these benchmarks just

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread Michael Larabel
On 12/15/2011 07:25 AM, Stefan Esser wrote: Am 15.12.2011 11:10, schrieb Michael Larabel: No, the same hardware was used for each OS. In terms of the software, the stock software stack for each OS was used. Just curious: Why did you choose ZFS on FreeBSD, while UFS2 (with journaling enabled)

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 05:26:27PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: 2011/12/13 Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com: On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 02:47:57PM +0100, O. Hartmann wrote: Not fully right, boinc defaults to run on idprio 31 so this isn't an issue. And yes, there are cases where

Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

2011-12-18 Thread matthew
Thanks. My request for the person documenting the tunings also runs = the benchmark to ensure expected behaviour. The installation, execut= ion and comparison against the benchmarks in the article is fairly simple.= br Note that some tuning may not be relevant or recommended

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Ian Smith
On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 02:37:52 +, Bruce Cran wrote: On 13/12/2011 09:00, Andrey Chernov wrote: I observe ULE interactivity slowness even on single core machine (Pentium 4) in very visible places, like 'ps ax' output stucks in the middle by ~1 second. When I switch back to SHED_4BSD,

Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

2011-12-18 Thread Adrian Chadd
The trouble is that there's lots of anecdotal evidence, but noone's really gone digging deep into _their_ example of why it's broken. The developers who know this stuff don't see anything wrong. That hints to me it may be something a little more creepy - as an example, the interplay between

Re: openpam oddity?

2011-12-18 Thread Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Michael Butler i...@protected-networks.net writes: Any ideas why courier-authdaemon is now reporting .. authdaemond: in openpam_dynamic(): No error: 0 authdaemond: in openpam_load_module(): no pam_unix.so found I've recompiled libpam and courier from scratch :-( Can you ktrace

Re: [head tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64

2011-12-18 Thread Bjoern A. Zeeb
On 18. Dec 2011, at 18:07 , Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: FreeBSD Tinderbox tinder...@freebsd.org writes: In file included from /src/sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c:400: /src/sys/dev/netmap/if_em_netmap.h: In function 'em_netmap_rxsync': /src/sys/dev/netmap/if_em_netmap.h:332: warning: dereferencing