Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:08:52PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: ps: for static library and loader, I derived the total size as the sum of the size of the text/data/bss section of the member object using :

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 25/05/2011 15:25 Ruslan Ermilov said the following: On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:08:52PM -0400, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: ps: for static library and loader, I derived the total size as the sum of the size of the

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread John Baldwin
On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 5:30:37 pm Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote: On 2011-05-24 22:09, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Many Makefile (espectially under sys/boot/) overwrite the value of CFLAGS. This is an issue if you want to

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: The original trouble I met, is that building for an i586 target in a 32bits jail, on top of an amd64 system[0] (I do not have control over that setup) produces incorrect binaries. The current fix I've got is to define

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 5:30:37 pm Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Dimitry Andric d...@freebsd.org wrote: On 2011-05-24 22:09, Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Many Makefile (espectially under

Re: [rfc] remove hlt_cpus et al sysctls and related code

2011-05-25 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 23/05/2011 19:28 Andriy Gapon said the following: I propose the following path for moving forward. - use hint.lapic.X.disabled to disable individual CPUs by their APIC ID - use machdep.hyperthreading_allowed tunable to disable second logical CPU on each real core The above should

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread John Baldwin
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:34:29 am Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: The original trouble I met, is that building for an i586 target in a 32bits jail, on top of an amd64 system[0] (I do not have control over that setup)

Re: [rfc] remove hlt_cpus et al sysctls and related code

2011-05-25 Thread Garrett Cooper
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 23/05/2011 19:28 Andriy Gapon said the following: I propose the following path for moving forward. - use hint.lapic.X.disabled to disable individual CPUs by their APIC ID - use machdep.hyperthreading_allowed tunable to

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 25/05/2011 19:28 John Baldwin said the following: On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:34:29 am Arnaud Lacombe wrote: The more broad issue with the setup is that gcc within that environment, without being told -march=i586, produces i686 instructions which are incompatible with the target CPU.

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:28 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:34:29 am Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: The original trouble I met, is that building for an i586 target in a 32bits

Weird issue with hastd(8)

2011-05-25 Thread Maxim Sobolev
Hi Pawel, I am observing strange errors while synchronizing the data between primary and secondary. I keep getting the following error messages: May 25 11:09:19 eights hastd[10113]: [test] (secondary) Unable to receive request header: Socket is not connected. May 25 11:09:24 eights

Re: Weird issue with hastd(8)

2011-05-25 Thread Maxim Sobolev
On 5/25/2011 11:21 AM, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Hi Pawel, I am observing strange errors while synchronizing the data between primary and secondary. I keep getting the following error messages: May 25 11:09:19 eights hastd[10113]: [test] (secondary) Unable to receive request header: Socket is not

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Kostik Belousov
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 09:43:15AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: It may be that your jail is not a pure 32-bit jail (some things like a 32-bit ps won't really work in with a 64-bit host for example). Also, until Err, is it broken (again) ? I committed the 32bit compat shims for kinfo_proc long

Re: Weird issue with hastd(8)

2011-05-25 Thread Daniel Gerzo
On 25.5.2011 20:24, Maxim Sobolev wrote: On 5/25/2011 11:21 AM, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Hi Pawel, I am observing strange errors while synchronizing the data between primary and secondary. I keep getting the following error messages: May 25 11:09:19 eights hastd[10113]: [test] (secondary) Unable

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread John Baldwin
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 1:03:10 pm Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:28 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:34:29 am Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: The original

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:44 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 1:03:10 pm Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:28 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:34:29 am Arnaud Lacombe wrote: Hi, On Wed, May

Re: [PATCH] Fix CFLAGS overwrite by Makefile

2011-05-25 Thread Arnaud Lacombe
Hi, On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Arnaud Lacombe lacom...@gmail.com wrote: I'm now trying to track down the original instruction triggering the SIGILL, but it is in a library and that section of the memory does not seem to be included in the core. Moreover I do not think I have any way on

Re: Weird issue with hastd(8)

2011-05-25 Thread Maxim Sobolev
On 5/25/2011 12:07 PM, Daniel Gerzo wrote: I can only confirm this behavior. I have already reported this to Mikolaj and we are trying to hunt down the problem. I have started observing suddenly after some update. Unfortunately I haven't noted which revision I started to observe this bug ;( Do