Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-16 Thread Vallo Kallaste
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 03:50:47PM -0800, Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, this can be CPU specific, but I'm not sure. I'll try to reproduce it on my home P2 system and P3-SMP lying under my desk at work. How much memory do these systems have? The P4 system has 128MB,

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-16 Thread Vallo Kallaste
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 11:45:16AM -0500, Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does this apply generally to all P4's, or just a subset? If all, it may be we want to add a P4-workaround to GENERIC so that P4's work better ouf of the box. If it's a select few, I wonder if there's some way to

DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Vallo Kallaste
Hi The kernel compiled from yesterday sources and with the abovementioned options disabled will not finish make -j2 buildworld on P4. Dies with bus error: /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/termios.c: In function `tcgetpgrp': /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/termios.c:104: internal error: Bus error Please submit a full

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Vallo Kallaste wrote: Hi The kernel compiled from yesterday sources and with the abovementioned options disabled will not finish make -j2 buildworld on P4. Dies with bus error: /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/termios.c: In function `tcgetpgrp': /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/termios.c:104: internal

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Vallo Kallaste
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 02:59:32AM -0800, Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The kernel compiled from yesterday sources and with the abovementioned options disabled will not finish make -j2 buildworld on P4. Dies with bus error: /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/termios.c: In function

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Wesley Morgan
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Vallo Kallaste wrote: Just finished '-j2 buildworld' and it did well with kernel which had the options enabled. Therefore I suppose that those options are still absolutely necessary to make use of -current system. These This may be a bit overstated. I removed those

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Vallo Kallaste
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 09:55:52AM -0500, Wesley Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Vallo Kallaste wrote: Just finished '-j2 buildworld' and it did well with kernel which had the options enabled. Therefore I suppose that those options are still absolutely necessary to

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread John Baldwin
On 15-Nov-2002 Wesley Morgan wrote: On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Vallo Kallaste wrote: Just finished '-j2 buildworld' and it did well with kernel which had the options enabled. Therefore I suppose that those options are still absolutely necessary to make use of -current system. These This may be

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Robert Watson
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, John Baldwin wrote: On 15-Nov-2002 Wesley Morgan wrote: On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Vallo Kallaste wrote: Just finished '-j2 buildworld' and it did well with kernel which had the options enabled. Therefore I suppose that those options are still absolutely necessary to

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Vallo Kallaste
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 11:45:16AM -0500, Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It only happens with P4's. I haven't seen it locally on a p4 test machine at work that I have built test releases on. Also, it would be nice to see if just adding one of the options fixed the problems. As

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Vallo Kallaste wrote: This may be a bit overstated. I removed those options from my kernel a few weeks ago and have no problems at all. Are you certain the problem is not specific to a particular CPU? Sorry, this can be CPU specific, but I'm not sure. I'll try to reproduce it on my home

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Robert Watson wrote: On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, John Baldwin wrote: It only happens with P4's. I haven't seen it locally on a p4 test machine at work that I have built test releases on. Also, it would be nice to see if just adding one of the options fixed the problems. As for NOTES, those

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Wesley Morgan
Based on this, are you recommending that the DISABLE_* still be used? Will I never see the problem with 512mb of ram? On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: The amount of RAM will also affect it. It can also happen on P3's and AMD K6's. It is a CPU bug related to the use of 4M pages.

Re: DISABLE_PSE DISABLE_PG_G still needed?

2002-11-15 Thread Terry Lambert
Wesley Morgan wrote: Based on this, are you recommending that the DISABLE_* still be used? Will I never see the problem with 512mb of ram? When Matt Dillon made some of the machdep.c allocation sizes dependent on the physical RAM size, it made the problem much less predictable, based on the