Re: FreeBSD 7.1 SMP on IBM x330 Dual Processor server
Thanks! Mel wrote: On Tuesday 27 January 2009 06:57:32 Tom Everett wrote: How does the kernel I would build from that link differ from the stock 7.1 kernel? It doesn't. It's the generic "upgrading fixes all" advice. I don't see anything since 7.1-RELEASE in 7.1-STABLE even, that would have the potential to fix your problem. Best thing you can do: 0) Check BIOS if there's something there that can make a CPU 'invisible'. 1) subscribe to freebsd-acpi and ask there if people have seen this before. 2) recompile kernel for acpi debugging, so you have information ready when people ask for it 3) regardless of the 1), search for or file a new PR with your ACPI information. More info here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/acpi-debug.html http://www.freebsd.org/support/bugreports.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD 7.1 SMP on IBM x330 Dual Processor server
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 06:57:32 Tom Everett wrote: > How does the kernel I would build from that link differ from the stock > 7.1 kernel? It doesn't. It's the generic "upgrading fixes all" advice. I don't see anything since 7.1-RELEASE in 7.1-STABLE even, that would have the potential to fix your problem. Best thing you can do: 0) Check BIOS if there's something there that can make a CPU 'invisible'. 1) subscribe to freebsd-acpi and ask there if people have seen this before. 2) recompile kernel for acpi debugging, so you have information ready when people ask for it 3) regardless of the 1), search for or file a new PR with your ACPI information. More info here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/acpi-debug.html http://www.freebsd.org/support/bugreports.html -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD 7.1 SMP on IBM x330 Dual Processor server
Am I correct in my understanding that the "stock" kernel is GENERIC? Ewald Jenisch wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 03:57:50PM -0700, Tom Everett wrote: I'm running the "stock" FreeBSD 7.1 kernel on an IBM x330 machine. The machine has two physical processors but it seems that FreeBSD 7.1 on sees one. I downloaded the kernel source and it seems that the GENERIC kernel has SMP installed. Is there something else I can try? Thanks in advance for your wisdom. Have you already tried to build a kernel for your system using the latest sources, i.e. cvsup-ing the sources and build your own system/kernel (see e.g. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/updating-upgrading.html) HTH -ewald ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD 7.1 SMP on IBM x330 Dual Processor server
How does the kernel I would build from that link differ from the stock 7.1 kernel? Ewald Jenisch wrote: On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 03:57:50PM -0700, Tom Everett wrote: I'm running the "stock" FreeBSD 7.1 kernel on an IBM x330 machine. The machine has two physical processors but it seems that FreeBSD 7.1 on sees one. I downloaded the kernel source and it seems that the GENERIC kernel has SMP installed. Is there something else I can try? Thanks in advance for your wisdom. Have you already tried to build a kernel for your system using the latest sources, i.e. cvsup-ing the sources and build your own system/kernel (see e.g. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/updating-upgrading.html) HTH -ewald ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD 7.1 SMP on IBM x330 Dual Processor server
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 03:57:50PM -0700, Tom Everett wrote: > I'm running the "stock" FreeBSD 7.1 kernel on an IBM x330 machine. The > machine has two physical processors but it seems that FreeBSD 7.1 on > sees one. I downloaded the kernel source and it seems that the GENERIC > kernel has SMP installed. Is there something else I can try? Thanks in > advance for your wisdom. Have you already tried to build a kernel for your system using the latest sources, i.e. cvsup-ing the sources and build your own system/kernel (see e.g. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/updating-upgrading.html) HTH -ewald ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
FreeBSD 7.1 SMP on IBM x330 Dual Processor server
I'm running the "stock" FreeBSD 7.1 kernel on an IBM x330 machine. The machine has two physical processors but it seems that FreeBSD 7.1 on sees one. I downloaded the kernel source and it seems that the GENERIC kernel has SMP installed. Is there something else I can try? Thanks in advance for your wisdom. $ sysctl -a | grep cpu kern.threads.virtual_cpu: 1 kern.ccpu: 0 kern.smp.cpus: 1 kern.smp.maxcpus: 16 debug.cpufreq.verbose: 0 debug.cpufreq.lowest: 0 debug.kdb.stop_cpus: 1 debug.stop_cpus_with_nmi: 1 debug.PMAP1changedcpu: 0 hw.ncpu: 1 hw.acpi.cpu.cx_lowest: C1 machdep.cpu_idle_hlt: 1 machdep.hlt_cpus: 0 dev.cpu.0.%desc: ACPI CPU dev.cpu.0.%driver: cpu dev.cpu.0.%location: handle=\_PR_.CPU1 dev.cpu.0.%pnpinfo: _HID=none _UID=0 dev.cpu.0.%parent: acpi0 dev.cpu.0.cx_supported: C1/0 dev.cpu.0.cx_lowest: C1 dev.cpu.0.cx_usage: 100.00% Copyright (c) 1992-2009 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. FreeBSD 7.1-RELEASE #0: Thu Jan 1 14:37:25 UTC 2009 r...@logan.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) III CPU family 1133MHz (1128.54-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x6b1 Stepping = 1 Features=0x383fbff real memory = 1073659904 (1023 MB) avail memory = 1036943360 (988 MB) ACPI APIC Table: ioapic1 irqs 16-31 on motherboard ioapic0 irqs 0-15 on motherboard kbd1 at kbdmux0 ath_hal: 0.9.20.3 (AR5210, AR5211, AR5212, RF5111, RF5112, RF2413, RF5413) acpi0: on motherboard acpi0: Overriding SCI Interrupt from IRQ 3 to IRQ 30 acpi0: [ITHREAD] acpi0: Power Button (fixed) Timecounter "ACPI-fast" frequency 3579545 Hz quality 1000 acpi_timer0: <24-bit timer at 3.579545MHz> port 0x4e8-0x4eb on acpi0 pcib0: on acpi0 pci0: on pcib0 vgapci0: mem 0xfeb8-0xfebf,0xf000-0xf7ff at device 1.0 on pci0 fxp0: port 0x2200-0x223f mem 0xfeb7f000-0xfeb7,0xfea0-0xfeaf irq 27 at device 2.0 on pci0 fxp0: Disabling dynamic standby mode in EEPROM fxp0: New EEPROM ID: 0x48a0 fxp0: EEPROM checksum @ 0x3f: 0xbe76 -> 0xbe76 miibus0: on fxp0 inphy0: PHY 1 on miibus0 inphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto fxp0: Ethernet address: 00:02:55:c6:69:58 fxp0: [ITHREAD] fxp1: port 0x2240-0x227f mem 0xfeb7e000-0xfeb7efff,0xfe90-0xfe9f irq 25 at device 10.0 on pci0 fxp1: Disabling dynamic standby mode in EEPROM fxp1: New EEPROM ID: 0x48a0 fxp1: EEPROM checksum @ 0x3f: 0x2d79 -> 0x2d79 miibus1: on fxp1 inphy1: PHY 1 on miibus1 inphy1: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto fxp1: Ethernet address: 00:02:55:c6:69:59 fxp1: [ITHREAD] isab0: port 0x440-0x44f at device 15.0 on pci0 isa0: on isab0 atapci0: port 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6,0x170-0x177,0x376,0x700-0x70f at device 15.1 on pci0 ata0: on atapci0 ata0: [ITHREAD] ata1: on atapci0 ata1: [ITHREAD] ohci0: mem 0xfeb7d000-0xfeb7dfff irq 7 at device 15.2 on pci0 ohci0: [GIANT-LOCKED] ohci0: [ITHREAD] usb0: OHCI version 1.0, legacy support usb0: on ohci0 usb0: USB revision 1.0 uhub0: <(0x1166) OHCI root hub, class 9/0, rev 1.00/1.00, addr 1> on usb0 uhub0: 2 ports with 2 removable, self powered pcib1: on acpi0 pci1: on pcib1 ahc0: port 0x2300-0x23ff mem 0xe000-0xefff irq 28 at device 3.0 on pci1 ahc0: [ITHREAD] aic7892: Ultra160 Wide Channel A, SCSI Id=7, 32/253 SCBs atapci1: port 0x2280-0x22ff,0x2400-0x24ff mem 0xefffe000-0xefffefff,0xeffc-0xeffd irq 20 at device 5.0 on pci1 atapci1: [ITHREAD] atapci1: [ITHREAD] ata2: on atapci1 ata2: [ITHREAD] ata3: on atapci1 ata3: [ITHREAD] ata4: on atapci1 ata4: [ITHREAD] ata5: on atapci1 ata5: [ITHREAD] atkbdc0: port 0x60,0x64 irq 1 on acpi0 atkbd0: irq 1 on atkbdc0 kbd0 at atkbd0 atkbd0: [GIANT-LOCKED] atkbd0: [ITHREAD] fdc0: port 0x3f0-0x3f5 irq 6 drq 2 on acpi0 fdc0: [FILTER] fd0: <1440-KB 3.5" drive> on fdc0 drive 0 sio0: <16550A-compatible COM port> port 0x3f8-0x3ff irq 4 flags 0x10 on acpi0 sio0: type 16550A sio0: [FILTER] cpu0: on acpi0 pmtimer0 on isa0 orm0: at iomem 0xc-0xcafff,0xcb000-0xcc7ff,0xcc800-0xd4fff pnpid ORM on isa0 ppc0: parallel port not found. sc0: at flags 0x100 on isa0 sc0: VGA <16 virtual consoles, flags=0x300> sio1: configured irq 3 not in bitmap of probed irqs 0 sio1: port may not be enabled vga0: at port 0x3c0-0x3df iomem 0xa-0xb on isa0 Timecounter "TSC" frequency 1128539539 Hz quality 800 Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec acd0: CDROM at ata1-master UDMA33 ad4: 476940MB at ata2-master SATA150 ad6: 476940MB at ata3-master SATA300 Waiting 5 seconds for SCSI devices to settle ar0: 476939MB status: READY ar0: disk0 READY (master) using ad4 at ata2-master ar0: disk1 READY (mirror) using ad6 at ata3-master Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/ar0s1a
Re: How to find CPU IDLE Percentage on SMP (Dual processor Host)
Devanand SP wrote: Hi Everyone, I am using a FreeBSD version 4.11 for running my BIND. I am in a need of setting up an audit for the CPU Utilization on my resolvers and have a query about finding the CPU IDLE percentage on a DUAL processor hosts. As the BIND binary uses only the first processor, the second CPU most of the time not used by BIND. So in this case the in built system utilities like top or sar does average the CPU IDLE percentage by adding up the First CPU's IDLE % + Second CPU's IDLE % /2. This in turn will give me a wrong result. So can someone suggest me on how I can get the right CPU IDLE %? Thanks. top -S will list the idle processes for each CPU separately. I hope this is a valid statement for 4.x. I am not certain. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
How to find CPU IDLE Percentage on SMP (Dual processor Host)
Hi Everyone, I am using a FreeBSD version 4.11 for running my BIND. I am in a need of setting up an audit for the CPU Utilization on my resolvers and have a query about finding the CPU IDLE percentage on a DUAL processor hosts. As the BIND binary uses only the first processor, the second CPU most of the time not used by BIND. So in this case the in built system utilities like top or sar does average the CPU IDLE percentage by adding up the First CPU's IDLE % + Second CPU's IDLE % /2. This in turn will give me a wrong result. So can someone suggest me on how I can get the right CPU IDLE %? Thanks. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Dual Processor?
Chris Maness wrote: > Is there a way to see if the system is utilizing both processors on a > two processor system? I seem to remember the top command in Linux > showed the load balance between the two processors (I could be wrong it > has been a while since I used it). Is there some ap that can display > these kinds of statistics? > You can see the idle statistics for each CPU by running top -S and see which cpu is running which process by looking at the C column (9th I think) Vince > Chris > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Dual Processor?
Jonathan Horne wrote: On Saturday 19 January 2008 10:30:49 am Chris Maness wrote: Is there a way to see if the system is utilizing both processors on a two processor system? I seem to remember the top command in Linux showed the load balance between the two processors (I could be wrong it has been a while since I used it). Is there some ap that can display these kinds of statistics? Chris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" its still top, it just doesnt display the same way it does in linux. look for a column C: PID USERNAMETHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 2211 jhorne1 960 125M 50892K CPU1 0 18.9H 4.59% Xorg 35271 jhorne1 960 107M 88500K select 1 20:03 0.44% opera 2301 jhorne1 960 81652K 50320K select 0 100:57 0.20% kstars the C column tells you what processor the thread is using. cheers, systat [pedja@ /usr/home/Pedja]$ systat /0 /1 /2 /3 /4 /5 /6 /7 /8 /9 /10 Load Average /0% /10 /20 /30 /40 /50 /60 /70 /80 /90 /100 root idle: cpu0 X root idle: cpu1 X ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Dual Processor?
On Saturday 19 January 2008 10:30:49 am Chris Maness wrote: > Is there a way to see if the system is utilizing both processors on a > two processor system? I seem to remember the top command in Linux > showed the load balance between the two processors (I could be wrong it > has been a while since I used it). Is there some ap that can display > these kinds of statistics? > > Chris > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" its still top, it just doesnt display the same way it does in linux. look for a column C: PID USERNAMETHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 2211 jhorne1 960 125M 50892K CPU1 0 18.9H 4.59% Xorg 35271 jhorne1 960 107M 88500K select 1 20:03 0.44% opera 2301 jhorne1 960 81652K 50320K select 0 100:57 0.20% kstars the C column tells you what processor the thread is using. cheers, -- Jonathan Horne http://dfwlpiki.dfwlp.org freebsd08 [EMAIL PROTECTED] dfwlp.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Dual Processor?
Is there a way to see if the system is utilizing both processors on a two processor system? I seem to remember the top command in Linux showed the load balance between the two processors (I could be wrong it has been a while since I used it). Is there some ap that can display these kinds of statistics? Chris ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Non-identical CPUs in dual-processor system
My general thoughts on the matter is that if the bios is happy and letting you boot up multi-cpu, then you should be fine. The OS is going to throw instructions at the two cpu's, and those instructions will be run. The only real difference between any chips that are i386-compatible that you insert in there are transistor sizes, and probably some brand-specific-deal that identifies brand name, model number, and chip-specific instructions (such as MMX). At the end of the day, you're sending x86 instructions to an x86 compatible cpu. I would think you're fine. If the OS is correctly measuring the load on the cpus, I twould think it should balance that load nicely, just be sure to compile your apps for threading where it's supported (perl comes to mind). Tony On Thu, 19 May 2005, Brian O'Shea wrote: Hello all, I have a dual-processor system that I have been using with only a single CPU for some time. Recently I got ahold of another CPU from an old retired system. I thought that both processors were identical (they came from what appears to be the same model PC, an HP Kayak XU). However, after booting the system I see that the processors are not the same: CPU information in mptable output: Processors: APIC ID Version State Family Model StepFlags 0 0x11BSP, usable 6 3 3 0x80fbff 1 0x11AP, usable 6 5 2 0x183fbff (sorry for the long lines) In this output you can see that the model for CPU0 is 3, but for CPU 1 it is 5. Also, the flags are different. Are there likely to be any adverse effects from using this combination of processors? There are no errors in dmesg, and the system appears to be using both processors: ... CPU: Pentium II/Pentium II Xeon/Celeron (266.08-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x633 Stepping = 3 Features=0x80fbff ... MPTable: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 ... cpu0 on motherboard cpu1 on motherboard ... SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! Thanks, -brian Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Non-identical CPUs in dual-processor system
Hello all, I have a dual-processor system that I have been using with only a single CPU for some time. Recently I got ahold of another CPU from an old retired system. I thought that both processors were identical (they came from what appears to be the same model PC, an HP Kayak XU). However, after booting the system I see that the processors are not the same: CPU information in mptable output: Processors: APIC ID Version State Family Model StepFlags 0 0x11BSP, usable 6 3 3 0x80fbff 1 0x11AP, usable 6 5 2 0x183fbff (sorry for the long lines) In this output you can see that the model for CPU0 is 3, but for CPU 1 it is 5. Also, the flags are different. Are there likely to be any adverse effects from using this combination of processors? There are no errors in dmesg, and the system appears to be using both processors: ... CPU: Pentium II/Pentium II Xeon/Celeron (266.08-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x633 Stepping = 3 Features=0x80fbff ... MPTable: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 ... cpu0 on motherboard cpu1 on motherboard ... SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! Thanks, -brian Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: dual processor
By default, no...I don't think it will use both processors. You have to make a custom kernel and enable SMP. Look here http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/kernelconfig-building.html for how to do it. In 5.x, I believe all you need is "options SMP", but I could be wrong. If you build the sample "LINT" kernel config, it will show you in there. Good luck, --Brian On 4/19/05, William Biggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a dual processor server Will freebsd use them both is so When I > install it how do I get it to use it ? > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > -- _-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_ Brian McCann Systems & Network Administrator, K12USA "I don't have to take this abuse from you -- I've got hundreds of people waiting to abuse me." -- Bill Murray, "Ghostbusters" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
dual processor
I have a dual processor server Will freebsd use them both is so When I install it how do I get it to use it ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Bruce Campbell wrote: > I've manually set: > > atacontrol mode 0 UDMA33 UDMA33 > > and the problem has not recurred. That sort of hints that there's some issue with the cabling, as UDMA33 is the highest you can go on a 40wire IDE cable. Going beyond requires an 80wire cable (& no longer than 450mm/18" as I recall). - Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (pref) | Snail: PO Box 370 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (alt) |Belconnen ACT 2616 Web:http://www.andymac.org/ |Australia ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: dual processor and FreeBSD 4.9
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-05-10 20:16:50 +0200]: > Hello, I am in trouble with FreeBSD 4.9p, I have got dual processor server > (2 x Pentium II 400MHz) and I would like that FreeBSD could be able to use > the both of them. I have readen that you need to compile the kernel once > again, but I would like to know which modifies I should apply to resolve > this trouble. > > Thanks. Google is your friend: http://myturl.com/000yP -- Mat Kovach Cleveland, Ohio ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: dual processor and FreeBSD 4.9
At 8:16 PM +0200 5/10/04, Vivailsud Staff Member wrote: Hello, I am in trouble with FreeBSD 4.9p, I have got dual processor server (2 x Pentium II 400MHz) and I would like that FreeBSD could be able to use the both of them. I have read that you need to compile the kernel once again, but I would like to know which modifies I should apply to resolve this trouble. When you look under /usr/src/sys/i386/conf, you will see a file called GENERIC. That is the kernel-definition that FreeBSD is distributed with. You will want to make a copy of that file, to whatever file name you want. Maybe call it DUALCPU. Inside the file, you will see the lines: # To make an SMP kernel, the next two are needed #optionsSMP # Symmetric MultiProcessor Kernel #optionsAPIC_IO # Symmetric (APIC) I/O You will want to uncomment those two 'option' lines, to get: # To make an SMP kernel, the next two are needed options SMP # Symmetric MultiProcessor Kernel options APIC_IO # Symmetric (APIC) I/O Earlier in the same file, you will see the lines: machine i386 cpu I386_CPU cpu I486_CPU cpu I586_CPU cpu I686_CPU ident GENERIC Comment out the lines for 'I386_CPU' and 'I486_CPU', and change the word 'GENERIC' to match the name you have chosen for your kernel configuration. So: machine i386 #cpuI386_CPU #cpuI486_CPU cpu I586_CPU cpu I686_CPU ident DUALCPU You then want to follow the instructions for building a kernel with the filename that you used for the kernel-configuration. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
dual processor and FreeBSD 4.9
Hello, I am in trouble with FreeBSD 4.9p, I have got dual processor server (2 x Pentium II 400MHz) and I would like that FreeBSD could be able to use the both of them. I have readen that you need to compile the kernel once again, but I would like to know which modifies I should apply to resolve this trouble. Thanks. Greets ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 03:02:46PM +0100, Francesco Casadei wrote: > [snip] > Yesterday I checked the drive ad6 with the Drive Fitness Test program from IBM. > Both quick and advanced test returned that the drive is ok. I then ran the test > against ad0 (the backup drive): the quick test showed that the drive was > defective because of "Excessive Shock". Re-executing the test gave same result. > I rebooted the system and disabled the S.M.A.R.T. option for the drive attached > to the motherboard's controller (i.e. the backup drive). Re-executing the quick > test showed that the drive is ok! > > After 16 hours of uptime and one level-0 file system dump all drives are still > using UDMA100. > > If for some reason the system will fall back again to PIO4 mode I will try to > remove the two following options from the kernel: > > # ISA optimization > options AUTO_EOI_1 > options AUTO_EOI_2 > > > If the problem won't still be solved then I will try in order the following: > - disable tagged queuing > - buy different hardware! > > Francesco Casadei > -- > You can download my public key from http://digilander.libero.it/fcasadei/ > or retrieve it from a keyserver (pgpkeys.mit.edu, wwwkeys.pgp.net, ...) > > Key fingerprint is: 1671 9A23 ACB4 520A E7EE 00B0 7EC3 375F 164E B17B > > end of the original message Disabling S.M.A.R.T. capability on ad0 did not solve the problem :( After ~5 days of uptime: Jan 9 05:39:34 zeus /kernel: ad6: SERVICE timeout tag=24 s=c0 e=04 Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: timeout sending command=00 s=c0 e=04 Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: flush queue failed Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: timeout sending command=c7 s=c0 e=04 Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: error executing commandad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: timeout sending command=00 s=c0 e=04 Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: flush queue failed Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: - resetting Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ata3: resetting devices .. ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: done Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: no request for tag=1 Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:39:34 zeus apcsmart[159]: Serial port read timed out Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus upsd[162]: Data for UPS [Back-UPS_PRO_650] is stale - check support module (shm_ctime too old) Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus upsmon[166]: Poll UPS [Back-UPS_Pro_650@localhost] failed - Data stale Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus /kernel: Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus upsmon[166]: Poll UPS [Back-UPS_Pro_650@localhost] failed - Data stale Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus upsd[162]: Host 127.0.0.1 disconnected Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus upsmon[166]: Communications with UPS Back-UPS_Pro_650@localhost lost Jan 9 05:39:44 zeus apcsmart[159]: Serial port read ok again Jan 9 05:39:46 zeus upsd[162]: Data for UPS [Back-UPS_PRO_650] is now OK Jan 9 05:39:46 zeus upsd[162]: Data source for UPS [Back-UPS_PRO_650]: SHM (65536) Jan 9 05:39:49 zeus upsd[162]: Connection from 127.0.0.1 Jan 9 05:39:49 zeus upsmon[166]: Communications with UPS Back-UPS_Pro_650@localhost established Jan 9 05:39:49 zeus upsd[162]: Client 127.0.0.1 logged into UPS [Back-UPS_Pro_650] Jan 9 05:39:54 zeus /kernel: ad6: READ command timeout tag=1 serv=0 - resetting Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ata3: resetting devices .. ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: done Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: READ command timeout tag=0 serv=1 - resetting Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ata3: resetting devices .. ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: done Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: timeout waiting for READY Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: timeout sending command=00 s=d0 e=04 Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: flush queue failed Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: - resetting Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ata3: resetting devices .. ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: done Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: READ command timeout tag=1 serv=0 - resetting Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ata3: resetting devices .. ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: done Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: READ command timeout tag=0 serv=1 - resetting Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ata3: resetting devices .. ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: done Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: no request for tag=0 Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: invalidating queued requests Jan 9 05:40:15 zeus /kernel: ad6: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting Jan 9
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
This article from The Register may be of interest: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/18267.html It talks about a bug in the VIA 686B Southbridge chipset that can cause data corruption when processing large amounts of data. Guy -- Guy DawsonI.T. Manager Crossflight Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07973 79781901753 776104 ** This email contains the views and opinions of a Crossflight Limited employee and at this stage are in no way a direct representation of Crossflight Limited. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. To ensure the integrity and appropriate use of its email system, Crossflight Limited reserves the right to examine any email held on its email system or sent to or from it. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. We strongly recomend that you check this email with your own virus software as Crossflight Limited will not be held responsible for any damage caused by viruses as a result of opening this email. ** To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
This would be legacy behaviour from the days of buggy ATA33/UDMA implementations, where falling back to PIO mode would allow a device with a buggy UDMA implementation (Unfortunately rather common at the time) to function. --Adam - Original Message - From: "Bruce Campbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 10:01 PM Subject: Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems > Quoting Bruce Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Quoting Matthew Emmerton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > [ cc'ing Soren since he's the ATA guru ] > > > > > > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode > > > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > > > > > > > The test continues to run with the ata controller in PIO mode, with > > > > slower performance, and higher load average. > > > > > > > > Once the master drops to PIO, attempts to access the slave then cause > > > > it to drop to PIO. > > > > > > Are you using 80-conductor cables on all your drives? These are required > > to > > > get consistent high throughput, and running without them may cause the > > > problems you're seeing. > > > > Thanks for the information about the design of IDE etc, and the suggestion > > about the cables. I was about to shuffle things to get the disks > > onto separate channels, but I now see that would be a mistake as my > > CD drive would share a cable with a disk. > > ps. As an aside, I have since determined that putting a PIO device and > a UDMA device on the same channel does not affect the performance > of the UDMA device, unless the PIO device is in use. So, sharing > a low use CD rom drive with a disk wouldn't be so bad. > > I am puzzled about the fallback to PIO concept. If a disk has > gives some sort of timeout error or whatever, why would trying > PIO correct the problem ? That seems equivalent to asking the > disk to do the same thing, just more slowly. > > In my case, some sort of timeout error occurs on ad0, so > it falls back to PIO, and works. A later access to ad1 > also yields a timeout error, and then it drops to PIO, > and works too. I'm fairly confident both disks did not > experience media errors at the same time, which suggests > a problem with the onboard IDE controller, or a driver bug. > > Tests continue... > > > > > > > > > This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
Quoting Bruce Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Quoting Matthew Emmerton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > [ cc'ing Soren since he's the ATA guru ] > > > > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode > > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > > > > > The test continues to run with the ata controller in PIO mode, with > > > slower performance, and higher load average. > > > > > > Once the master drops to PIO, attempts to access the slave then cause > > > it to drop to PIO. > > > > Are you using 80-conductor cables on all your drives? These are required > to > > get consistent high throughput, and running without them may cause the > > problems you're seeing. > > Thanks for the information about the design of IDE etc, and the suggestion > about the cables. I was about to shuffle things to get the disks > onto separate channels, but I now see that would be a mistake as my > CD drive would share a cable with a disk. ps. As an aside, I have since determined that putting a PIO device and a UDMA device on the same channel does not affect the performance of the UDMA device, unless the PIO device is in use. So, sharing a low use CD rom drive with a disk wouldn't be so bad. I am puzzled about the fallback to PIO concept. If a disk has gives some sort of timeout error or whatever, why would trying PIO correct the problem ? That seems equivalent to asking the disk to do the same thing, just more slowly. In my case, some sort of timeout error occurs on ad0, so it falls back to PIO, and works. A later access to ad1 also yields a timeout error, and then it drops to PIO, and works too. I'm fairly confident both disks did not experience media errors at the same time, which suggests a problem with the onboard IDE controller, or a driver bug. Tests continue... This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 01:42:03PM -0500, Bruce Campbell wrote: [snip] > > I don't have it enabled: > > hw.ata.tags: 0 > > I've manually set: > > atacontrol mode 0 UDMA33 UDMA33 > > and the problem has not recurred. > > -- > Bruce Campbell > Engineering Computing > CPH-2374B > University of Waterloo > (519)888-4567 ext 5889 > > > This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > end of the original message Yesterday I checked the drive ad6 with the Drive Fitness Test program from IBM. Both quick and advanced test returned that the drive is ok. I then ran the test against ad0 (the backup drive): the quick test showed that the drive was defective because of "Excessive Shock". Re-executing the test gave same result. I rebooted the system and disabled the S.M.A.R.T. option for the drive attached to the motherboard's controller (i.e. the backup drive). Re-executing the quick test showed that the drive is ok! After 16 hours of uptime and one level-0 file system dump all drives are still using UDMA100. If for some reason the system will fall back again to PIO4 mode I will try to remove the two following options from the kernel: # ISA optimization options AUTO_EOI_1 options AUTO_EOI_2 If the problem won't still be solved then I will try in order the following: - disable tagged queuing - buy different hardware! Francesco Casadei -- You can download my public key from http://digilander.libero.it/fcasadei/ or retrieve it from a keyserver (pgpkeys.mit.edu, wwwkeys.pgp.net, ...) Key fingerprint is: 1671 9A23 ACB4 520A E7EE 00B0 7EC3 375F 164E B17B msg14309/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Followup to "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 06:36:29AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > > The fallback is clearly wrong because it turns isolated media errors > into pessimized i/o for the whole disk at best, system hangs during > resets next best, and system crashes at worst. I keep a disk with bad > media on line for testing some of this, and zap the fallback using the > following patch (hope this is complete; it was edited from a larger > patch). Perhaps the right answer is to test uptime and do the fallback if the error happens in the first minute, at least for permanently-mounted disks. In any case, retries in the current mode should be exhausted first. -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 01:42:03PM -0500, Bruce Campbell wrote: > [snip] > I don't have it enabled: > > hw.ata.tags: 0 > > I've manually set: > > atacontrol mode 0 UDMA33 UDMA33 > > and the problem has not recurred. > > -- > Bruce Campbell > Engineering Computing > CPH-2374B > University of Waterloo > (519)888-4567 ext 5889 > > > This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > end of the original message # atacontrol mode 3 Master = PIO4 Slave = ??? # atacontrol mode 3 udma33 xxx Master = UDMA33 Slave = ??? # atacontrol mode 3 Master = UDMA33 Slave = ??? # find / -name nonexistent -print # atacontrol mode 3 Master = PIO4 Slave = ??? After little disk activity, like searching a file throughout the entire filesystem, the second disk of the RAID array falls back to PIO4 mode. I booted the system from the live system cd (2nd disk of the freebsd distribution set) then ran dd to read from and write to ad6: no errors were found. Francesco Casadei -- You can download my public key from http://digilander.libero.it/fcasadei/ or retrieve it from a keyserver (pgpkeys.mit.edu, wwwkeys.pgp.net, ...) Key fingerprint is: 1671 9A23 ACB4 520A E7EE 00B0 7EC3 375F 164E B17B msg14040/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Followup to "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
Quoting Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Bruce Campbell wrote:
>
> > At present, I don't suspect bad media because the error message is
> > "WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0" which doesn't suggest a specific
> > sector/track etc, and running with UDMA33 instead of UDMA100 makes the
> problem
> > appear to vanish.
>
> The fallback is clearly wrong because it turns isolated media errors
> into pessimized i/o for the whole disk at best, system hangs during
> resets next best, and system crashes at worst. I keep a disk with bad
> media on line for testing some of this, and zap the fallback using the
> following patch (hope this is complete; it was edited from a larger
> patch).
Thanks for the patch. Under moderate load, I am seeing occasional
instances of:
/kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting
/kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done
and everything keeps on working normally via DMA. ie it does not drop to PIO.
The more manacing case is this:
Dec 30 23:26:59 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting
Dec 30 23:26:59 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done
Dec 30 23:26:59 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ad0: timeout waiting for cmd=ef s=d0 e=00
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode
Dec 30 23:27:00 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done
So it appears it would no longer with DMA, but it would work with PIO.
If it is manually set back to UDMA with the atacontrol command, it times
out again, and falls back to PIO.
However, a soft reboot, and all is well again.
>
> %%%
> Index: ata-disk.c
> ===
> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/dev/ata/ata-disk.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.139
> diff -u -2 -r1.139 ata-disk.c
> --- ata-disk.c17 Dec 2002 16:26:22 - 1.139
> +++ ata-disk.c18 Dec 2002 01:03:37 -
> @@ -597,5 +606,5 @@
> else {
> ata_dmainit(adp->device, ata_pmode(adp->device->param), -1, -1);
> - printf(" falling back to PIO mode\n");
> + printf(" NOT falling back to PIO mode\n");
> }
> TAILQ_INSERT_HEAD(&adp->device->channel->ata_queue, request, chain);
> @@ -603,4 +612,5 @@
> }
>
> +#if 0
> /* if using DMA, try once again in PIO mode */
> if (request->flags & ADR_F_DMA_USED) {
> @@ -613,4 +623,5 @@
> return ATA_OP_FINISHED;
> }
> +#endif
>
> request->flags |= ADR_F_ERROR;
> %%%
>
> Bruce
>
--
Bruce Campbell
Engineering Computing
CPH-2374B
University of Waterloo
(519)888-4567 ext 5889
This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: Followup to "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Bruce Campbell wrote:
> At present, I don't suspect bad media because the error message is
> "WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0" which doesn't suggest a specific
> sector/track etc, and running with UDMA33 instead of UDMA100 makes the problem
> appear to vanish.
The fallback is clearly wrong because it turns isolated media errors
into pessimized i/o for the whole disk at best, system hangs during
resets next best, and system crashes at worst. I keep a disk with bad
media on line for testing some of this, and zap the fallback using the
following patch (hope this is complete; it was edited from a larger
patch).
%%%
Index: ata-disk.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/dev/ata/ata-disk.c,v
retrieving revision 1.139
diff -u -2 -r1.139 ata-disk.c
--- ata-disk.c 17 Dec 2002 16:26:22 - 1.139
+++ ata-disk.c 18 Dec 2002 01:03:37 -
@@ -597,5 +606,5 @@
else {
ata_dmainit(adp->device, ata_pmode(adp->device->param), -1, -1);
- printf(" falling back to PIO mode\n");
+ printf(" NOT falling back to PIO mode\n");
}
TAILQ_INSERT_HEAD(&adp->device->channel->ata_queue, request, chain);
@@ -603,4 +612,5 @@
}
+#if 0
/* if using DMA, try once again in PIO mode */
if (request->flags & ADR_F_DMA_USED) {
@@ -613,4 +623,5 @@
return ATA_OP_FINISHED;
}
+#endif
request->flags |= ADR_F_ERROR;
%%%
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
Quoting Francesco Casadei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 03:57:16PM -0500, Bruce Campbell wrote: > > > > I am seeing a problem with ata disks on 4 new systems, which > > I believe is either a bug in the ata driver, or a problem with > > the onboard IDE controller, or something else. Systems are as follows: > > ... > > Motherboard: ASUS A7M266-D > > CPUs : 2 x 2000+ AMD MP > > Memory : 2 x 512MB Crucial part: CT6472Y265 > > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > - > > resetting > > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > > resetting > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > > resetting > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > > resetting > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: timeout waiting for cmd=ef s=d0 > e=00 > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode > > Same problem here, but slightly different configuration: > > # atacontrol list > ATA channel 0: > Master: ad0 ATA/ATAPI rev 5 > Slave: no device present > ATA channel 1: > Master: acd0 ATA/ATAPI rev 0 > Slave: no device present > ATA channel 2: > Master: ad4 ATA/ATAPI rev 5 > Slave: no device present > ATA channel 3: > Master: ad6 ATA/ATAPI rev 5 > Slave: no device present > > ad4 and ad6 are attached to a Promise FastTrak 100 TX2 ATA RAID controller. > > # atacontrol mode 0 > Master = UDMA100 > Slave = ??? > > # atacontrol mode 1 > Master = PIO4 > Slave = ??? > > # atacontrol mode 2 > Master = UDMA100 > Slave = ??? > > # atacontrol mode 3 > Master = PIO4 > Slave = ??? > > ad6 falls back to PIO mode on heavy I/O activity, i.e. when the system does > a > level 0 file systems dump from the RAID 1 array (ad4,ad6) to the backup disk > ad0. > Rebooting and rebuilding the array with the Promise BIOS utility temporarily > solve the problem. The system may be up and running for 1-4 weeks doing a > level 0 dump every morning at 5:30am and then one day the drive ad6 falls > back > to PIO mode again (little before the completion of fs dump). > > Do the hard drives you are using support the ATA tagged queuing? And if so, > do > you have TQ enbled? I don't have it enabled: hw.ata.tags: 0 I've manually set: atacontrol mode 0 UDMA33 UDMA33 and the problem has not recurred. -- Bruce Campbell Engineering Computing CPH-2374B University of Waterloo (519)888-4567 ext 5889 This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: Followup to 'fallback to PIO mode' on dual processor AMD systems
Bruce Campbell said: > > - try UDMA100 with the drives directly attached (ie. no removable tray) - > maybe try a non onboard IDE controller yes I would reccomend a PCI ide controller, such as the Promise ATA/100, or Promise ATA/66. Also be sure your IDE cables are 18" and not 24" or 32" some people like to go crazy with overly long IDE cables. Sometimes for me longer then 18" and I get CRC errors(but nothing fatal). > - shuffle the disks to see if the problems follow the disks or not > > At present, I don't suspect bad media because the error message is "WRITE > command timeout tag=0 serv=0" which doesn't suggest a specific > sector/track etc, and running with UDMA33 instead of UDMA100 makes the > problem appear to vanish. I read your burn in procedures, a couple additions to throw in I'd reccomend: CPUBurn: http://users.ev1.net/~redelm/ I've only tried it on linux but the page lists *BSD too. This package also includes a memory tester, I usually run 1 CPUburn process per CPU and as many memory testers as I have RAM. If you try to load too many the newest process will segfault(since it can't allocate memory), harmless. Run this for at least 24 hours. memtest86: http://www.memtest86.com/ when you boot it, go to the options screen and turn on all tests, and run it through once or twice, with your system I'd expect 1 pass of all tests to be done in about 20 hours. most of my servers that run IDE have DMA/33 controllers, the few that have faster ones all use Promise ATA/100 cards or 3ware 6800 series raid cards. I haven't trusted recent AMD/VIA/Intel IDE chips for a while. nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Followup to "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
By the way, I've determined our removable IDE disk trays are manufactured by SNT (http://www.snt.com.tw/metal.htm) and are part number SNT-129. It looks like these are the same ones startech sells. I've placed my hardware configuration here: http://www.freebsd.uwaterloo.ca/twiki/bin/view/Freebsd/DualAmd2000 Out of my 4 AMD systems, my test results are now: - 1 refuses to die - 1 panic'ed and died, after not being able to drop to PIO. Many fsck errors upon reboot. The console error was "ata0: resetting devices .. ad0: DMA limited to UDMA33, non-ATA66 cable or device" - 2 dropped to PIO after about 15 hours of tests, and ran fine (but slowly) with PIO As for the the 2 that dropped to PIO and worked, I rebooted and manually ran atacontrol mode 0 UDMA33 UDMA33 and restarted the tests. No problems in 36 hours so far. My 4 Intel systems (which only have a UDMA33 controller on the motherboard) have also been running 48 hours no problems. The test I run is... dbench 1 sleep 300 dbench 2 sleep 300 dbench 3 ... up to about "dbench 80" and then I kill and restart. With UDMA100, "dbench 10" gave 43 MB/Sec With UDMA33, "dbench 10" gives 37 MB/Sec I still plan to: - try UDMA100 with the drives directly attached (ie. no removable tray) - maybe try a non onboard IDE controller - shuffle the disks to see if the problems follow the disks or not At present, I don't suspect bad media because the error message is "WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0" which doesn't suggest a specific sector/track etc, and running with UDMA33 instead of UDMA100 makes the problem appear to vanish. This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 03:57:16PM -0500, Bruce Campbell wrote: > > I am seeing a problem with ata disks on 4 new systems, which > I believe is either a bug in the ata driver, or a problem with > the onboard IDE controller, or something else. Systems are as follows: > > Motherboard: ASUS A7M266-D > CPUs : 2 x 2000+ AMD MP > Memory : 2 x 512MB Crucial part: CT6472Y265 > > Disks (all UDMA100): > > Master Slave > System 1: WDC WD400BB WDC WD1000BB > System 2: WDC WD400BB WDC WD1000BB > System 3: WDC WD400BB WDC WD800BB > System 4: WDC WD400BB Maxtor 98196H8 > > Kernel : 4.7-RELEASE, custom kernel (compared to GENERIC): > > commented out: > > cpu I386_CPU > cpu I486_CPU > > enabled > > options SMP # Symmetric MultiProcessor Kernel > options APIC_IO # Symmetric (APIC) I/O > > > I am running a test with "dbench" (/usr/ports/benchmarks/dbench) > with a script which runs: > > dbench 1 > sleep for 5 minutes > dbench 2 > sleep for 5 minutes > dbench 3 > ... > > to simulate 1,2,3... clients. > > The following has happened on systems 2,3 and 4, after about 15 hours > of running the test: > > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - > resetting > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > resetting > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > resetting > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > resetting > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: timeout waiting for cmd=ef s=d0 e=00 > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > The test continues to run with the ata controller in PIO mode, with > slower performance, and higher load average. > > Once the master drops to PIO, attempts to access the slave then cause > it to drop to PIO. > > If I run: > > atacontrol mode 0 UDMA100 UDMA100 > > attempts to access either drive result in a delay until the controller > drops to PIO, and then operations resume. A soft reboot and things > work in UDMA mode again. Also tried UDMA33 and UDMA66 with no change. > I also tried "atacontrol reinit 0" with no help. > > Theories when I search the web for "fallback to PIO mode" include: > > - bad disks > - something to do with thermal recalibration > > I don't believe the problems are bad disks, as the slave drops to PIO > after the master does, and I can't get in back to UDMA, other than by > soft reboot. Plus I see the problem on 6 of 8 disks. > > The problem is very repeatable. > > Can anyone offer any ideas, or suggest investigative steps ? I have a system > in PIO mode right now. > > Thanks, > > -- > Bruce Campbell > Engineering Computing > CPH-2374B > University of Waterloo > (519)888-4567 ext 5889 > > > This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > end of the original message Same problem here, but slightly different configuration: # atacontrol list ATA channel 0: Master: ad0 ATA/ATAPI rev 5 Slave: no device present ATA channel 1: Master: acd0 ATA/ATAPI rev 0 Slave: no device present ATA channel 2: Master: ad4 ATA/ATAPI rev 5 Slave: no device present ATA channel 3: Master: ad6 ATA/ATAPI rev 5 Slave: no device present ad4 and ad6 are attached to a Promise FastTrak 100 TX2 ATA RAID controller. # atacontrol mode 0 Master = UDMA100 Slave = ??? # atacontrol mode 1 Master = PIO4 Slave = ??? # atacontrol mode 2 Master = UDMA100 Slave = ??? # atacontrol mode 3 Master = PIO4 Slave = ??? ad6 falls back to PIO mode on heavy I/O activity, i.e. when the system does a level 0 file systems dump from the RAID 1 array (ad4,ad6) to the backup disk ad0. Rebooting and rebuilding the array with the Promise BIOS utility temporarily solve the problem. The system may be up and running for 1-4 weeks doing a level 0 dump every morning at 5:30am and then one day the drive ad6 falls back to PIO mode again (little before the completion of fs dump). Do the hard drives you are using support the ATA tagged queuing? And if so, do you have TQ enbled? Francesco Casadei -- You can download my public key from http://digilander.libero.it/fcasadei/ or retrieve it from a keyserver (pgpkeys.mit.edu, wwwkeys.pgp.net, ...) Key fingerprint is: 1671 9A23 ACB4 520A E7EE 00B0 7EC3 375F 164E B17B msg13998/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signa
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
Quoting Matthew Emmerton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [ cc'ing Soren since he's the ATA guru ] > > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode > > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > > > The test continues to run with the ata controller in PIO mode, with > > slower performance, and higher load average. > > > > Once the master drops to PIO, attempts to access the slave then cause > > it to drop to PIO. > > Are you using 80-conductor cables on all your drives? These are required to > get consistent high throughput, and running without them may cause the > problems you're seeing. Thanks for the information about the design of IDE etc, and the suggestion about the cables. I was about to shuffle things to get the disks onto separate channels, but I now see that would be a mistake as my CD drive would share a cable with a disk. Anyway, they all have the 80 conductor cable. I forgot to add some environmental and other information. The 4 AMD systems are in Aopen hx08 towers, with 400 watt power supplies, and 5 auxilliary fans (in addition to the power supply fan, and fan on each cpu). They are in an air conditioned machine room. The CPU and motherboard temperatures are within spec. I mention this as I note many reported AMD system problems traced to overheating. All drives are installed in removeable drive bays. I don't have the make/model on hand right now. They were $19 CAD. ($13USD). The low cost makes me suspicious now, but... I'm running the same tests on 4 single processor 2.4GHz Intel systems. They have not failed in this manner so far. Initially, I had 1GB memory modules in the AMD systems (I can't remember the make) and the systems froze and rebooted randomly. I moved to Crucial 512MB modules to cure that problem. This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
[ cc'ing Soren since he's the ATA guru ] > I am seeing a problem with ata disks on 4 new systems, which > I believe is either a bug in the ata driver, or a problem with > the onboard IDE controller, or something else. Systems are as follows: > > Motherboard: ASUS A7M266-D > CPUs : 2 x 2000+ AMD MP > Memory : 2 x 512MB Crucial part: CT6472Y265 > > Disks (all UDMA100): > > Master Slave > System 1:WDC WD400BB WDC WD1000BB > System 2: WDC WD400BB WDC WD1000BB > System 3: WDC WD400BB WDC WD800BB > System 4: WDC WD400BB Maxtor 98196H8 > > Kernel : 4.7-RELEASE, custom kernel (compared to GENERIC): > > commented out: > > cpu I386_CPU > cpu I486_CPU > > enabled > > options SMP # Symmetric MultiProcessor Kernel > options APIC_IO # Symmetric (APIC) I/O > > > I am running a test with "dbench" (/usr/ports/benchmarks/dbench) > with a script which runs: > > dbench 1 > sleep for 5 minutes > dbench 2 > sleep for 5 minutes > dbench 3 > ... > > to simulate 1,2,3... clients. > > The following has happened on systems 2,3 and 4, after about 15 hours > of running the test: > > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - > resetting > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > resetting > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > resetting > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 > resetting > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: timeout waiting for cmd=ef s=d0 e=00 > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode > Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done > > The test continues to run with the ata controller in PIO mode, with > slower performance, and higher load average. > > Once the master drops to PIO, attempts to access the slave then cause > it to drop to PIO. > > If I run: > > atacontrol mode 0 UDMA100 UDMA100 > > attempts to access either drive result in a delay until the controller > drops to PIO, and then operations resume. A soft reboot and things > work in UDMA mode again. Also tried UDMA33 and UDMA66 with no change. > I also tried "atacontrol reinit 0" with no help. > > Theories when I search the web for "fallback to PIO mode" include: > > - bad disks > - something to do with thermal recalibration > > I don't believe the problems are bad disks, as the slave drops to PIO > after the master does, and I can't get in back to UDMA, other than by > soft reboot. Plus I see the problem on 6 of 8 disks. > > The problem is very repeatable. > > Can anyone offer any ideas, or suggest investigative steps ? I have a system > in PIO mode right now. The reason the slave drops to PIO after the master does is by design - the master and slave have to use the same signalling mode since they're on the same cable. (People often report lackluster performance of fast UDMA hard drives with non-UDMA CD-ROMs on the same channel.) Are you using 80-conductor cables on all your drives? These are required to get consistent high throughput, and running without them may cause the problems you're seeing. -- Matt Emmerton To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
ata "fallback to PIO mode" on dual processor AMD systems
I am seeing a problem with ata disks on 4 new systems, which I believe is either a bug in the ata driver, or a problem with the onboard IDE controller, or something else. Systems are as follows: Motherboard: ASUS A7M266-D CPUs : 2 x 2000+ AMD MP Memory : 2 x 512MB Crucial part: CT6472Y265 Disks (all UDMA100): Master Slave System 1: WDC WD400BB WDC WD1000BB System 2: WDC WD400BB WDC WD1000BB System 3: WDC WD400BB WDC WD800BB System 4: WDC WD400BB Maxtor 98196H8 Kernel : 4.7-RELEASE, custom kernel (compared to GENERIC): commented out: cpu I386_CPU cpu I486_CPU enabled options SMP # Symmetric MultiProcessor Kernel options APIC_IO # Symmetric (APIC) I/O I am running a test with "dbench" (/usr/ports/benchmarks/dbench) with a script which runs: dbench 1 sleep for 5 minutes dbench 2 sleep for 5 minutes dbench 3 ... to simulate 1,2,3... clients. The following has happened on systems 2,3 and 4, after about 15 hours of running the test: Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 - resetting Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done Dec 30 23:26:59 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 resetting Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 resetting Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: WRITE command timeout tag=0 serv=0 resetting Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: timeout waiting for cmd=ef s=d0 e=00 Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ad0: trying fallback to PIO mode Dec 30 23:27:00 ecserv13 /kernel: ata0: resetting devices .. done The test continues to run with the ata controller in PIO mode, with slower performance, and higher load average. Once the master drops to PIO, attempts to access the slave then cause it to drop to PIO. If I run: atacontrol mode 0 UDMA100 UDMA100 attempts to access either drive result in a delay until the controller drops to PIO, and then operations resume. A soft reboot and things work in UDMA mode again. Also tried UDMA33 and UDMA66 with no change. I also tried "atacontrol reinit 0" with no help. Theories when I search the web for "fallback to PIO mode" include: - bad disks - something to do with thermal recalibration I don't believe the problems are bad disks, as the slave drops to PIO after the master does, and I can't get in back to UDMA, other than by soft reboot. Plus I see the problem on 6 of 8 disks. The problem is very repeatable. Can anyone offer any ideas, or suggest investigative steps ? I have a system in PIO mode right now. Thanks, -- Bruce Campbell Engineering Computing CPH-2374B University of Waterloo (519)888-4567 ext 5889 This mail sent through www.mywaterloo.ca To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: Dual Processor
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 10:45:55AM +0530, Abhay Kumar Srivastava wrote: > > Hi, > I want to run freeBSD 3.2 on a dual processor intell xenon > machine. I tried using the SMP option in the config file. Is there a > utility by which i can accertain if freeBSD has detected both the > processors and can use them. Anything that displays process status, e.g. top. Status messages are also displayed at boot time. 3.2 is positively ancient, though - you really should use something released this century. Kris msg11019/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Dual Processor
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 15:15, Abhay Kumar Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > I want to run freeBSD 3.2 on a dual processor intell xenon > machine. I tried using the SMP option in the config file. Is there a > utility by which i can accertain if freeBSD has detected both the > processors and can use them. Don't know what 3.2 does in this respect, or why you want to run that old a version of FreeBSD for that matter, but dmesg should tell you what hardware is detected (you can also grep through /var/log/messages) cheers, Duncan -- The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this email in any way. Dark Blue Sea does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Dark Blue Sea. Dark Blue Sea does not warrant that any attachments are free from viruses or other defects. You assume all liability for any loss, damage or other consequences which may arise from opening or using the attachments. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Dual Processor
Hi, I want to run freeBSD 3.2 on a dual processor intell xenon machine. I tried using the SMP option in the config file. Is there a utility by which i can accertain if freeBSD has detected both the processors and can use them. Regards, Abhay To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
