Re: Call for UMA (allocator) testers.

2002-03-11 Thread Jeff Roberson

I have received a few reports of panics when loading modules.  If you're
going to run it you may want to staticly compile in pseudofs/procfs, etc.

Thanks,
Jeff

On Sun, 10 Mar 2002, Glenn Gombert wrote:

  I have the UMA patch installed on two systems here, a 500Mhz K7 system and
 dual PIII SMP box, both of which have WITNESS and INVARIANTS configured in
 the kernel. I will run them for the next few days, and report anything that
 looks unusual in operation :)

 GG.


 I'd like people to test with WITNESS and INVARIANTS, although with these
 options on it is somewhat slower than the original kernel.  With these
 disabled it is on par.  If you have a SMP machine you will get witness
 warnings if you run low on memory.  There is no real problem except that
 witness doesn't understand that the condition is safe.
 
 If you do test this patch, please send me an email so I know how many
 people are using this.  If you get a lock order violation other than
 acquring duplicate lock of same type please let me know.  If you get a
 panic, please give me a stack trace (tr in ddb) and the output of call
 uma_print_stats in the debugger if that is possible.
 
 This has been debugged and tested over several months so it is quite
 stable for me.  Hopefully it will be stable for you too. :-)
 
 The patch and new files are available at:
 http://www.chesapeake.net/~jroberson/uma.tar
 
 Untar into src/sys and apply the patch.  After you rerun config you should
 be ready to compile.
 
 Thanks,
 Jeff
 
 
 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
 
 Glenn Gombert
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]



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



Re: Call for UMA (allocator) testers.

2002-03-11 Thread Steve Kargl

On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 06:24:08PM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote:
 I have received a few reports of panics when loading modules.  If you're
 going to run it you may want to staticly compile in pseudofs/procfs, etc.
 

Jeff,

There were problems with loading modules, but I haven't 
seen any panics.  The loading problems were fixed yesterday
in revisions 1.77 and 1.78 of kern_linker.c.  I suspect
people, who imay have had panics, need to update to the latest
version of kern_linker.c.

-- 
Steve

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



Re: Call for UMA (allocator) testers.

2002-03-11 Thread Jeff Roberson


 There were problems with loading modules, but I haven't
 seen any panics.  The loading problems were fixed yesterday
 in revisions 1.77 and 1.78 of kern_linker.c.  I suspect
 people, who imay have had panics, need to update to the latest
 version of kern_linker.c.

 --
 Steve


Good news for me.  Thanks, I haven't caught up on my commit mail yet.
I'll make sure this fixes the panic for me as soon as I get home.  For
those of you that saw the panic, can you update this file and try again?


Thanks,
Jeff


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



Re: Call for UMA (allocator) testers.

2002-03-11 Thread Steve Kargl

On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 06:36:53PM -0500, Jeff Roberson wrote:
 
  There were problems with loading modules, but I haven't
  seen any panics.  The loading problems were fixed yesterday
  in revisions 1.77 and 1.78 of kern_linker.c.  I suspect
  people, who imay have had panics, need to update to the latest
  version of kern_linker.c.
 
 
 Good news for me.  Thanks, I haven't caught up on my commit mail yet.
 I'll make sure this fixes the panic for me as soon as I get home.  For
 those of you that saw the panic, can you update this file and try again?
 

Whoops, revisions 1.78 and 1.79.  Damn off-by-one errors :-)

-- 
Steve

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



Re: Call for UMA (allocator) testers.

2002-03-10 Thread Glenn Gombert

 I have the UMA patch installed on two systems here, a 500Mhz K7 system and
dual PIII SMP box, both of which have WITNESS and INVARIANTS configured in
the kernel. I will run them for the next few days, and report anything that
looks unusual in operation :)

GG.


I'd like people to test with WITNESS and INVARIANTS, although with these
options on it is somewhat slower than the original kernel.  With these
disabled it is on par.  If you have a SMP machine you will get witness
warnings if you run low on memory.  There is no real problem except that
witness doesn't understand that the condition is safe.

If you do test this patch, please send me an email so I know how many
people are using this.  If you get a lock order violation other than
acquring duplicate lock of same type please let me know.  If you get a
panic, please give me a stack trace (tr in ddb) and the output of call
uma_print_stats in the debugger if that is possible.

This has been debugged and tested over several months so it is quite
stable for me.  Hopefully it will be stable for you too. :-)

The patch and new files are available at:
http://www.chesapeake.net/~jroberson/uma.tar

Untar into src/sys and apply the patch.  After you rerun config you should
be ready to compile.

Thanks,
Jeff


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

Glenn Gombert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


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