- Original Message -
From: George Kontostanos gkontos.m...@gmail.com
It still really smells like something higher up the layers than the
controller tbh.
We have tried many combinations with different drives. Any other suggestions?
See below
Confused as your 9240-4i is a SAS2008
- Original Message -
From: George Kontostanos gkontos.m...@gmail.com
You are right, the chip specs say: LSISAS2108 RAID-on-Chip
The drives are identified as mfisyspd0, mfisyspd1, etc.
The following might be interesting to you:-
- Original Message -
From: Alexander Motin m...@freebsd.org
is cs ss 0001 rs 0001 tfd 40 serr 0088
This line (ss and rs fields) tells me that device haven't confirmed
completion of one NCQ command. Bits set in serr field mean 10b to 8b
Decode Error and
We're seeing some strange timeout errors on some new Supermicro
X9DRT-HF MB's we here when combined with KINGSTON HyperX 3K SSD's
It seems that when connnected to the second channel reads often
timeout stalling all IO under 8.3-RELEASE-p3
When this happens we see:-
Jul 27 14:35:59 lon059
- Original Message -
From: Clayton Milos c...@milos.co.za
Hi guys
I've had an issue for some time now. When I'm copying a lot of files over to
ZFS usually using SMB it causes a panic and locks up the server.
I'm running FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE with a custom kernel. I've just pulled
- Original Message -
From: Dr Josef Karthauser j...@tao.org.uk
So, take care if the memory doesn't report any failures, it might still be
faulty.
p.s. It was my fault that I wasn't running ECC memory on the system! :/.
We've even seen this with ECC memory.
Running the memory in a
- Original Message -
From: James Snow s...@teardrop.org
I have a ZFS server on which I've seen periodic checksum errors on
almost every drive. While scrubbing the pool last night, it began to
report unrecoverable data errors on a single file.
I compared an md5 of the supposedly
- Original Message -
From: James Snow s...@teardrop.org
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:05:32PM +0100, Dr Joe Karthauser wrote:
Hi James,
It's almost definitely a memory problem. I'd change it ASAP if I were
you.
I lost about 70mb from my zfs pool for this very reason just a few
weeks
- Original Message -
From: Michael Ross g...@ross.cx
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 2:23 PM
Subject: 8.2 -8.3 regression on disk writes
Hello,
using 8.2 the machine runs fine,
using 8.3 or higher, not so much.
In laymans terms,
if I do too many
- Original Message -
From: Sean Bruno sean...@yahoo-inc.com
No real change. I suspect something else is going on here that I don't
understand. I note that when the system malfunctions now, the system
cannot boot and requires me to enter the bios to check my settings.
We've had a
- Original Message -
From: Oliver Fromme o...@lurza.secnetix.de
I need a working DVD drive, so I'm now considering to
downgrade to 8-stable. But then again, TMPFS didn't work
a well for me as it does in 9-stable (which was the main
reason for me to upgrade), so I'm kind of stuck in
Daniel Braniss writes:
Would some kind soul point me to a howto for configuring IPMI on
FreeBSD? I have a Dell PowerEdge 840 that supports IPMI, but I have
no idea how to set it up - either in the BIOS or in FreeBSD. I've
messed around with ipmitools a little, but I haven't gotten it to
work.
- Original Message -
From: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com
If you are NOT using FreeBSD for any area or some areas , would you please
list those areas with most important first to least important last ?
Although we would like to we cant use FreeBSD to run some Linux based
1. The community - Unlike Linux which is very fragmented by all the different flavours and hence individual communities, FreeBSD
has one community who are always happy to help with hints tips and advice. This simply cant be beaten!
2. Stability - There's always issue with any OS but in our many
- Original Message -
From: Rick Macklem rmack...@uoguelph.ca
To: Oliver Brandmueller o...@e-gitt.net
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: 9-STABLE, ZFS, NFS, ggatec - suspected memory leak
Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
Hi,
After figuring an
Original Message -
From: Rick Macklem rmack...@uoguelph.ca
At a glance, it looks to me like 8.x is affected. Note that the
bug only affects the new NFS server (the experimental one for 8.x)
when exporting ZFS volumes. (UFS exported volumes don't leak)
If you are running a server that
- Original Message -
From: Dmitry Morozovsky ma...@rinet.ru
Quick update:
I have received 1.0b from Mar 19, flashed it, but nothing changes regarding
disk subsystem; moreover, now kernel is constantly whining about acpi_tz0.
Will investigate further.
Which version of FreeBSD is
- Original Message -
From: Dmitry Morozovsky ma...@rinet.ru
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: m...@freebsd.org; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:42 AM
Subject: Re: ahci hangs on Supermicro MicroCloud second channel
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012, Steven
- Original Message -
From: Dmitry Morozovsky ma...@rinet.ru
To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Cc: m...@freebsd.org
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 4:10 PM
Subject: ahci hangs on Supermicro MicroCloud second channel
Dear colleagues,
I've start testing SuperMicro MicroCloud[1] to have
- Original Message -
From: Dmitry Morozovsky ma...@rinet.ru
Well, ahci problem solved, but I still have much worse performance (and
different on ada0 and ada1!):
ada0, MC 50-60 MBps
ada1, MC 13-25 MBps
ada*, 5017 130+ MBps
Could you please post SATA/AHCI BIOS settings from your
- Original Message -
From: Dmitry Morozovsky ma...@rinet.ru
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: m...@freebsd.org; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:45 PM
Subject: Re: ahci hangs on Supermicro MicroCloud second channel
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012, Steven
- Original Message -
From: Willem Jan Withagen w...@digiware.nl
Just as a followup.
I reported the above problem
Today it occurred again. But this time I was able to find a firmware
upgrade for the Corsair Force GT from 1.2 to 1.3.3
(Need Win7 to be able to upgrade)
Hi guys which version of ZFS support will be included in 8.3?
Regards
Steve
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is
We've got a machine here with a suspected failed disk but
the ahci driver seems to be hiding the details of any failure
and only displaying Synchronize cache failed to the console.
Switching to IDE mode in the bios and using the old adX devices
show info such as:-
ad6: 953869MB Seagate
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
...
The long test is still running, as I stated above. Also, just as a data
point: folks should remember to completely ignore the remaining
percentage shown -- it is hardly ever accurate, especially on Western
- Original Message -
From: Qing Li qin...@freebsd.org
Sorry about the delayed response. No, this one just fell through the cracks.
Has anyone responded ? Does it still exist in 9.x ?
We discovered yesterday that adding the following routes,
which are present in:
We did a minor kernel update on a large storage machine here today which runs FreeBSD 8.2 and to our surprise it failed to boot at
the loader with ZFS: i/o error - all block copies unavailable.
After some digging we discovered that this was likely due to the fact that the BIOS only enumerates
- Original Message -
From: Chuck Swiger
On Jan 23, 2012, at 9:04 AM, Steven Hartland wrote:
After some digging we discovered that this was likely due
to the fact that the BIOS only enumerates the first 12 disks
and this machine has more than that in the root zpool which
was a striped
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Seaman
Even if you do split up your pool into vdevs using 8 drives, you will
still run into the problem with zfs being unable to assemble the pool
unless it sees all of the drives in it.
Interesting that this only appeared as part of a minor kernel
- Original Message -
From: Olivier Smedts
In my case, I fixed it by having a separate /boot on some USB sticks --
this was only ever accessed to read the kernel, kernel modules and
bootloader at boot time, so no worries over performance.
Out of interest whats the procedure you used
On a similar note I'm actually quite concerned by the inclusion of
these patches by default in the OS version of ssh as we've seen
several cases of it causing noticeable performance degradation
instead of improvement.
I've not tested on 9, but this was certainly the case on 8.2.
Regards
Currently http://www.freebsd.org/security/ states 8.2
is Estimated EoL July 31, 2012.
Given 9.0 has only just been released can we assume this
is just out of date and 8.2 will be supported for longer
than this?
Along those lines are there any more plans for additional
point releases to 8 or
You can do this using csup for example:-
cp /usr/share/examples/cvsup/stable-supfile
/usr/share/examples/cvsup/9.0-release-supfile
Edit the following to the relavent values
*default host=CHANGE_THIS.FreeBSD.org
*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_9
e.g.
*default host=cvs.uk.FreeBSD.org
*default
- Original Message -
From: Michael Larabel michael.lara...@phoronix.com
I was the on that carried out the testing and know that it was on the
same system.
All of the testing, including the system tables, is fully automated.
Under FreeBSD sometimes the parsing of some component
Having a quick look at those results aren't there a few annomolies e.g.
THREADED I/O TESTER for Oracle reports 10255.75MB/s
Which is clearly impossible for a single HD system meaning
its basically caching the entire data set?
Regards
Steve
With all the discussion I thought I'd give a buildworld
benchmark a go here on a spare 24 core machine. ULE
tested fine but with 4BSD it wont even boot panicing
with the following:-
http://screensnapr.com/v/hwysGV.png
This is on a clean 8.2-RELEASE-p4
Upgrading to RELENG_9 fixed this but its a
Lars Engels wrote:
9.0 ships with gcc and clang which both need to be compiled, 8.2 only
has gcc.
Ahh, any reason we need both, and is it possible to disable clang?
Regards
Steve
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay
- Original Message -
From: Daniil Cherednik dchered...@masterhost.ru
I am not trying to start a holy war, but I really need to increase
performance of our hosting in FreeBSD.
Is there something you need from apache that means you
cant use nginx for instead?
nginx + php-fpm is much
- Original Message -
From: Alexander V. Chernikov melif...@freebsd.org
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 184, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:DONE
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: DST
::A.B.C.D
I'm unable to reproduce an issue on (nearly) GENERIC 8-S, but I see
nearly the same
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
The problem is that the networking layer is not TRULY available by the
time ntpd starts. This does have to do with NIC drivers, but the same
behaviour can be seen on all NICs, including excellent ones like em(4).
- Original Message -
From: Peter Maloney peter.malo...@brockmann-consult.de
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: zfs parition probing causing long delay at BTX loader
On 10/20/2011 07:23 PM, Steven Hartland wrote:
Installing a new
- Original Message -
From: Mark Saad nones...@longcount.org
Yes after the beastie menu we also have a noticable pause
before the kernel start booting, just white square top left hand
corner, not tracked that one down yet, any ideas?
Steve the change you need is in HEAD not sure if it
Installing a new machine here which has 10+ disks
we're seeing BTX loader take 50+ seconds to enumerate
the disks.
After doing some digging I found the following thread
on the forums which hinted that r198420 maybe the
cause.
http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=12705
A quick change to
- Original Message -
From: Mickaël Maillot mickael.mail...@gmail.com
same problem here after ~ 30 days with a production server and 2 SSD Intel
X25M as L2.
so we update and reboot the 8-STABLE server every month.
Old thread but also seeing this on 8.2-RELEASE so looks like this
may
- Original Message -
From: Artem Belevich a...@freebsd.org
No, there was no PR.
L2arc CPU hogging after ~24 days was fixed in r218180 in -HEAD and was
MFC'ed to 8-stable in r218429 early in February '11.
If you're using 8-RELEASE, upgrading to 8-STABLE would be something to
- Original Message -
From: Artem Belevich a...@freebsd.org
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Steven Hartland
kill...@multiplay.co.uk wrote:
Thanks for the confirmation there Artem, we currently can't use 8-STABLE
due to the serious routing issue, seem like every packet generates
- Original Message -
From: Li, Qing qing...@bluecoat.com
RTM_MISS: Lookup failed on this address: len 184, pid: 0, seq 0, errno
0, flags:DONE
locks: inits:
sockaddrs: DST
::A.B.C.D
Would it be possible for you to email me what exactly does ::A.B.C.D
map into WRT your system or
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
1428 root1 440 11900K 2860K select 0 0:17 0.00%
/usr/sbin/ntpd -c /conf/ME/ntp.conf -p /var/run/ntpd.pid -f
And route -n monitor shows no anomalies here.
Maybe you should tcpdump to find out if
We just updated a machine to 8-STABLE and I've noticed
that ntpd is using notible amounts of CPU 5-7% which
is very high for such a trivial daemon.
8.2-STABLE FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE #16: Tue Oct 4 09:53:17 UTC 2011
truss indicates its constantly checking and reading
from a socket
0.047297485
- Original Message -
From: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
..
This seems very much like the following pr which was fixed:-
Remove a bogusly introduced rtalloc_ign() in rev. 1.335/SVN 178029,
generating an RTM_MISS for every IP packet forwarded making user space
routing daemons
- Original Message -
From: Jamie Gritton ja...@freebsd.org
In essence I think we can get the following flow where 1# = process1
and 2# = process2
1#1. prison1.pr_uref = 1 (single process jail)
1#2. prison_deref( prison1,...
1#3. prison1.pr_uref-- (prison1.pr_uref = 0)
1#3.
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
BTW, I suspect the following scenario, but I am not able to
verify it either via testing or in the code:
- last process in a dying jail exits
- pr_uref of the jail reaches zero
- pr_uref of prison0 gets decremented
- you attach
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
BTW, I suspect the following scenario, but I am not able to verify it either via
testing or in the code:
- last process in a dying jail exits
- pr_uref of the jail reaches zero
- pr_uref of prison0 gets decremented
- you attach
- Original Message -
From: Roger Marquis marq...@roble.com
To: freebsd-j...@freebsd.org; freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
Repeat this enough times and prison0.pr_uref reaches zero.
To reach
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
thanks for doing this! I'll reiterate my suspicion just in case - I think that
you should look for the cases where you stop a jail, but then re-attach and
resurrect the jail before it's completely dead.
Yer that's where I
- Original Message -
From: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Looking through the code I believe I may have noticed a scenario which could
trigger the problem.
Given the following code:-
static void
prison_deref(struct prison *pr, int flags)
{
struct prison *ppr, *tpr;
int
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
diff -u sys/kern/kern_jail.c.orig sys/kern/kern_jail.c
--- sys/kern/kern_jail.c.orig 2011-08-20 21:17:14.856618854 +0100
+++ sys/kern/kern_jail.c2011-08-20 21:18:35.307201425 +0100
@@ -2455,7 +2455,8 @@
- Original Message -
From: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Something else you many be more interested in Andriy:-
I added in debugging options DDB INVARIANTS to see if I can get a more
useful info and the panic results in a looping panic constantly scrolling up
the console
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
on 20/08/2011 23:24 Steven Hartland said the following:
- Original Message - From: Steven Hartland
Looking through the code I believe I may have noticed a scenario which could
trigger the problem.
Given the following
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Thats interesting, are you using http as an example or is that something thats
been gleaned from the debugging of our output? I ask as there's only one process
running in each of our jails and thats a single java process.
It's
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Probably I have mistakenly assumed that the 'prison' in prison_derefer() has
something to do with an actual jail, while it could have been just prison0 where
all non-jailed processes belong.
That makes sense as this particular
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
on 16/08/2011 23:43 Steven Hartland said
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
on 17/08/2011 15:15 Steven Hartland said
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Thanks to the debug that Steven provided and to the help that I received from
Kostik, I think that now I understand the basic mechanics of this panic, but,
unfortunately, not the details of its root cause.
It seems like
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
on 15/08/2011 17:56 Steven Hartland said
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
We have 352 thread entries starting with:-
#0 sched_switch (td=0x8083e4e0, newtd=0xff0012d838c0,
flags=Variable flags is not available.
23 with:-
cpustop_handler () at atomic.h:285
and 16 with:-
#0 fork_trampoline ()
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
on 15/08/2011 13:34 Steven Hartland said the following:
(kgdb) list *0x8053b691
0x8053b691 is in vm_fault (/usr/src/sys/vm/vm_fault.c:239).
234 /*
235 * Find the backing store object
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
on 15/08/2011 15:51 Steven Hartland said
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
To: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
on 15/08/2011 17:56 Steven Hartland said
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
Maybe test it on couple of machines first just in case I overlooked something
essential, although I have a report from another use that the patch didn't break
anything for him (it was tested for an unrelated issue).
We've got
- Original Message -
From: Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org
Anyway, we really would need much more information in order to take a
proactive action.
Would it be possible to access to one of the panic'ing machine? Is it
always the same panic which is happening or it is variadic (like:
That's not the issue as its happening across board over 130 machines :(
Regards
Steve
- Original Message -
From: Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org
I'd really point the finger to faulty hw.
Please run all the necessary diagnostic tools for catching it.
Attilio
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:59:36AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
That's not the issue as its happening across board over 130 machines :(
Agreed, bad hardware sounds unlikely here. I could believe some strange
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
on 10/08/2011 18:35 Steven Hartland said the following:
Fatal double fault
...
#14 0x803a2cc9 in sched_switch (td=0x0, newtd=0x0, flags=Variable
flags
is not available.
)
at /usr/src/sys/kern/sched_ule.c:1852
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
I would really appreciate if you could try to reproduce the problem with the
patch
that I sent earlier.
Hi Andriy, what's the risk of this patch causing other issues?
I ask as to get results from this we've going to have to
- Original Message -
From: Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org
I would really appreciate if you could try to reproduce the
problem with the patch that I sent earlier.
Hi Andriy, what's the risk of this patch causing other issues?
I can not estimate.
The code is supposed to affect only
- Original Message -
From: Rick Macklem rmack...@uoguelph.ca
Just a random thought that is probably not relevent, but...
Is it possible that some change for the upgrade is making the machines
run hotter and they're failing when they overhead?
The machines have full HW monitoring and
We're currently experiencing a large number of kernel panics
on FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE across a large number of machines here.
The base stack reported is a double fault with no additional
details and CTRL+ALT+ESC fails to break to the debugger as
does and NMI, even though it at least tries printing
- Original Message -
From: Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.uk
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:22 PM
Subject: debugging frequent kernel panics on 8.2-RELEASE
We're currently experiencing a large number of kernel panics
on FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:22:52PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
The base stack reported is a double fault with no additional
details and CTRL+ALT+ESC fails to break to the debugger as
does and NMI, even though
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
In combination with this, we use the following in /etc/rc.conf (the
dumpdev line is important, else savecore won't pick up anything):
dumpdev=auto
I thought this was ment to be the default from back in the 6.x days
- Original Message -
From: Willem Jan Withagen w...@digiware.nl
...
So I tried opgrading my firmware to 1.49, but to no avail.
The system keeps panicing.
So I guess that there is still a coding error somewhere in the driver.
But I'm not into this enough to even know where to start
- Original Message -
From: Willem Jan Withagen w...@digiware.nl
Well the main key to the problem is that on 2011/06/06 the new version
from Areca got imported. So if you have all your boxes with kernels
predating 06-06, you're not running the new code.
It the above is true and if you
Areca's work well. The ARC-1220 (8 ports) should do you, not the cheapest but
good support and performance.
Regards
Steve
- Original Message -
From: Matt Thyer matt.th...@gmail.com
To: sta...@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 1:48 PM
Subject: PCIe SATA HBA for ZFS on
- Original Message -
From: Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com
The zfs IO code overloads the EILSEQ error code and uses it as a checksum
error code. Returning that error for the same block on all disks is
definitely weird. Could you have run a partitioning tool, or some other
program
- Original Message -
From: Clifton Royston clift...@volcano.org
This has been discussed at length in the past, causing me to write an
rc.d script to work around the problem. You can drop this script into
/usr/local/etc/rc.d, chmod 755 it, and make use of it appropriately.
The comments
The cpu requirements are usually quite low for fsck, what your
most likely seeing is disk contention due to the amount of IO.
Personally I would recommend to consider moving to 8.2 + ZFS as
our filing system as it removes fsck from the equation, as well
as giving lots of other benefits.
- Original Message -
From: Pete French petefre...@ingresso.co.uk
This is why I got rid of it - my application is a lot of CGI scripts. The
overload condition is that we run out of memory - and we run *way* out
of memory its never just a little overflow, it;s either handleable or
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
Was there any conclusion from this guys, was there a bad disk
causing the issue?
Regards
Steve
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net
I would say probably the disk mostly. Perhaps a driver or firmware bug
on the Areca. Hard to say. The drive totally failed a month or so
later. Also, moved to a later firmware on the areaca controller after
that and all has
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
I apologise in advance if I have already reviewed your situation, but if
you could please provide full smartctl -a output for the disk, I can
review the data to see if anything looks out of place.
An example: on some
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com
Bummer. Competitor's drivers make use of pass(4) and/or xpt(4), the
result being that you can see (and talk to directly) all the disks which
are on the RAID card. No need for a CLI utility getting in the way,
etc..
Silly question but have you checked your ram for issues, we had a machine
with seemingly unexplained problems and hangs and it turned out to be
a duff stick of ram which wasn't being chip killed.
- Original Message -
From: Lev Serebryakov l...@serebryakov.spb.ru
To: Brandon Gooch
However, I'm a wee bit curious of whether I will be able to upgrade from
8.2RC3 or if I should wait until 8.2 is actually released with the setup
(I _CAN_ wait a week or two).
Looks like its already been tagged so should be any time now:-
/usr/src/UPDATING:-
...
20110221:
8.2-RELEASE.
- Original Message -
From: Garrett Cooper gcoo...@freebsd.org
As a followup to this and based on discussions with other folks,
the fact that it's using hlt to halt CPUs without rescheduling tasks /
masking interrupts, etc is not good. So none of the *hlt* sysctls are
really doing the
I'm trying to debug a possibly failing CPU, so I thought it would
be easy just disable the cores using machdep.hlt_cpus and see if
we see the panic's we've been seeing.
The problem is it seems ULE doesnt properly support machdep.hlt_cpus
and still schedules processes onto the halted cpus which
Just updated a box to the 8.2-PREREL as of friday and now when we do any
serious amounts of network traffice we see:-
bge0: watchdog timeout -- resetting
bge0: link state changed to DOWN
bge0: link state changed to UP
The interface never recovers, we have to use remote console to down, wait
30
- Original Message -
From: Gary Jennejohn gljennj...@googlemail.com
Looking at the kernel source it appears that only sched_4bsd.c makes use
of hlt_cpus_mask.
Given ULE is default do these need to be either removed totally or at least
conditionally based on the scheduler choice as
This may be totally unrelated to bge, investigating a potential failing stick
of ram in the machine in question so until we've ruled this out as the cause
don't want to waste anyone's time.
I did however notice the logic between the two fixes for DMA on 5704's on PCIX
in svn differ so wondering
For reference I've found that an alternative is to set the following
in loader.conf:-
hint.lapic.2.disabled=1
hint.lapic.3.disabled=1
2 and 3 here are the apic numbers displayed by dmesg on boot for the
cpu's
Obviously this requires a reboot so no perfect for all uses but it does
work for what
201 - 300 of 500 matches
Mail list logo
