I just checked in a change to HEAD (247814) that compiles CTL in GENERIC
but disables it by default. (i.e. it uses no memory) You can re-enable
it with the existing loader tunable.
i.e. set kern.cam.ctl.disable=0 in /boot/loader.conf and it will be
enabled.
Ken
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at
Hi Ken,
I'd like to fix this for 9.2 and -HEAD.
Would you mind if I disabled CTL in GENERIC (but still build it as a
module) until you've fixed the initial RAM reservation that it
requires?
Thanks,
Adrian
On 22 December 2012 22:32, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
Ken,
Does CAM
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 04:50:22 +1100, Ian Smith wrote:
[following up my own message with a later report]
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:21:23 +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
On 23 December 2012 10:22, Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 03:45:39 +0300, Sergey Kandaurov
Well, now there is release, but -STABLE is still pre, while -STABLE
code is already well past release builds ;)
Eh, imperfect world...
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/9-1-minimal-ram-requirements-tp5771583p5773408.html
Sent from the freebsd-stable
from Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com:
In an ideal world, the bits that will almost certainly become FreeBSD 9.1
would not appear on the masters, or any of the mirrors, until the same
instant that the release announcement is set to freebsd-annou...@freebsd.org.
In practice this doesn't
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Thomas Mueller muelle...@insightbb.com wrote:
from Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com:
In an ideal world, the bits that will almost certainly become FreeBSD 9.1
would not appear on the masters, or any of the mirrors, until the same
instant that the release
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Thomas Mueller muelle...@insightbb.com
wrote:
from Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com:
In an ideal world, the bits that will almost certainly become FreeBSD 9.1
would not appear on the
What you are seeing is behind-the-scenes preparation.
The release is official when, and only when, a security-signed email is
sent to freebsd-annou...@freebsd.org from the Release Engineering team.
Yeah, Mark. You're right.
Further, I'm right too. What should I install on blank
node? Beta? No
It has happened in the past that even as the release bits were propogating,
One Last Big Bug was found and those bits had to be pulled and re-done. It
would have looked like you had FreeBSD Release X.Y but you wouldn't have had
the final bits that everyone else did.
I'm aware of this. I
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 06:02:33PM +0100, Zoran Kolic wrote:
Seeing 9.1-RELEASE instead 9.1-PRERELASE
or 9.1-RC4 is also a bad suprise for me...
I assume it does not look like release is the lack
of packages.
What you are seeing is behind-the-scenes preparation.
The release is official
Seeing 9.1-RELEASE instead 9.1-PRERELASE
or 9.1-RC4 is also a bad suprise for me...
I assume it does not look like release is the lack
of packages. Simply, I installed and compiled from
ports. Cannot say if it stands on the site as a
decoration, but I have it on desktop and laptop
and found it
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Zoran Kolic zko...@sbb.rs wrote:
Seeing 9.1-RELEASE instead 9.1-PRERELASE
or 9.1-RC4 is also a bad suprise for me...
I assume it does not look like release is the lack
of packages. Simply, I installed and compiled from
ports.
Making a Release is a well
9.1-RC3 works just fine as well for some weeks :-) When your computers
are not production machines I also recommend this to you Zoran to test
RC in order to make RELEASE a better product. What you have now is
labeled as RELEASE but it is a decoration. The RELEASE will be
different from what
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Zoran Kolic zko...@sbb.rs wrote:
9.1-RC3 works just fine as well for some weeks :-) When your computers
are not production machines I also recommend this to you Zoran to test
RC in order to make RELEASE a better product. What you have now is
labeled as RELEASE
So, it's fine and recommended to remove ctl device
from kernel? I installed from image on the site two
weeks ago and consider it release.
Zoran
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
I always considered FreeBSD to be the most unabiguous, straightforward
and sometimes even raw, but still extremely powerful and innovative,
operating system out there. Seeing 9.1-RELEASE instead 9.1-PRERELASE
or 9.1-RC4 is also a bad suprise for me...
I have fallback into RC3 and I think the
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote:
If it works for 99.99% percent of the users and fails for the
remaining miniscule percentage because they have a very peculiar
hardware, very small amount of ram etc, should the release called
buggy and unstable? I
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=174671
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/9-1-minimal-ram-requirements-tp5771583p5771862.html
Sent from the freebsd-stable mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
On 23 December 2012 10:22, Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 03:45:39 +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
This (i.e. the kmem_map too small message seen with kernel memory
shortage) could be due to CAM CTL ('device ctl' added in 9.1), which is
quite a big kernel memory
On 23 Dec 2012 06:40, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi guys,
Would someone please file a PR for this? This is a huge unused
allocation of memory for something that honestly likely shouldn't have
been included by default in GENERIC.
I've cc'ed ken on a reply to this. Hopefully
On 12/23/2012 01:35 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
On 23 Dec 2012 06:40, Adrian Chadd adr...@freebsd.org
mailto:adr...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi guys,
Would someone please file a PR for this? This is a huge unused
allocation of memory for something that honestly likely shouldn't have
been
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:21:23 +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
On 23 December 2012 10:22, Ian Smith smi...@nimnet.asn.au wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 03:45:39 +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
This (i.e. the kmem_map too small message seen with kernel memory
shortage) could be due to CAM
Ok, I'll see about disabling it in GENERIC and STABLE/9 for now, at
least until Ken has some idea of what's going on.
Thanks,
Adrian
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe,
.. has someone filed a PR for it?
Adrian
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
The reason it grabs RAM up front is that it was written for an embedded
platform where memory allocations might fail later on after things had been
running and memory got fragmented.
At this point, no, it doesn't need to allocate all of its memory up front.
I actually need to put some effort
On 12/23/2012 12:27 AM, Jakub Lach wrote:
Guys, I've heard about some absurd RAM requirements
for 9.1, has anybody tested it?
e.g.
http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=36314
jup, I can comfirm this with nanobsd (cross) compiled
for my soekris net4501 which has 64 MB mem:
from dmesg:
On 23 December 2012 03:40, Marten Vijn i...@martenvijn.nl wrote:
On 12/23/2012 12:27 AM, Jakub Lach wrote:
Guys, I've heard about some absurd RAM requirements
for 9.1, has anybody tested it?
e.g.
http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=36314
jup, I can comfirm this with nanobsd
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 03:45:39 +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
On 23 December 2012 03:40, Marten Vijn i...@martenvijn.nl wrote:
On 12/23/2012 12:27 AM, Jakub Lach wrote:
Guys, I've heard about some absurd RAM requirements
for 9.1, has anybody tested it?
e.g.
Ken,
Does CAM CTL really need to pre-allocate 35MB of RAM at startup?
Adrian
On 22 December 2012 16:45, Sergey Kandaurov pluk...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 December 2012 03:40, Marten Vijn i...@martenvijn.nl wrote:
On 12/23/2012 12:27 AM, Jakub Lach wrote:
Guys, I've heard about some absurd
Hi guys,
Would someone please file a PR for this? This is a huge unused
allocation of memory for something that honestly likely shouldn't have
been included by default in GENERIC.
I've cc'ed ken on a reply to this. Hopefully after the holidays he can
chime in and figure out what's going on.
30 matches
Mail list logo
