On Tue, 9 May 2006, Max Khon wrote:
Yes, there seems to be an awful lot of noise being made about the fact that
the system does, in fact, work exactly as documented, and that the
configuration being complained about is one that is specifically documented
as being unsupported and undesirable.
I have my first SMP amd64 box at the office now to work with, and thought it
was all going to be easy. Sadly not, or at least, not yet. :-)
I configured dhcpd, tftpd, and nfs to export the 6.1 install CD from my
notebook. All good so far. The problem is as follows: if I insert the 6.1
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Michael Butler wrote:
On a 6-stable machine with sufficient RAM, i.e. no swapping and 215MB free
in 'top', I'm seeing ..
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/imb# netstat -m
386/529/915 mbufs in use (current/cache/total)
384/254/638/17088 mbuf clusters in use
On Mon, 29 May 2006, Michael Ortmann wrote:
im using 6_stable on sparc64 and get a 100% reproduceable kernel panic. it
crashes when i try to usr/create the tap0 interface. (i discovered it when i
tried to run openvpn). so i guess it may be the tap driver on sparc64. i can
provice kernel core
On Wed, 31 May 2006, dawnshade wrote:
Hi all.
I have periodically crashes 6.1-RELEASE running on Intel MB S875WP1
in messages i see: May 31 06:14:50 mail savecore: reboot after panic: page
fault
i installed debug kernel and got a core, but can't understand what happens.
results of
On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Wilko Bulte wrote:
My dual-CPU DS20 Alpha box can more or less consistently be
forced into a panic like:
FreeBSD/alpha (goldrush.wbnet) (ttyd0)^
login: panic: lockmgr: thread 0xfc007d9d4a80, not exclusive lock holder
0xfc006052d260 unlocking
cpuid = 1
KDB: enter:
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Rutger Bevaart wrote:
Try adding
debug.mpsafenet=0
to your /boot/loader.conf
and see if that resolves your problem. We experienced the same on a number
of boxes which somehow seemes related to the locking mechanism used in the
networking stack. The Dell's (1750,
On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Václav Haisman wrote:
I've yet another LOR to report.
lock order reversal: (sleepable after non-sleepable)
1st 0xc45651f8 inp (tcpinp) @ sys/netinet/tcp_usrreq.c:1029
2nd 0xc3a2f9a4 user map (user map) @ sys/vm/vm_map.c:2997
On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
I need to know which files under /var a proccess (httpd here) is acessing.
It is not logs because I have a different partition for logs.
gstat tells me that slice ad0s1h (my /var) is 100% frequently, and in fact
with fstat I can see a number of httpd
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
A lot of people have answered and told you about lsof, which is a great
tool, and can give you a momentary snapshot of the files a process has
open. You might also be interested in getting a log of accesses, which you
can do
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Martin Blapp wrote:
I just upgraded from 5.5 (stable btw.) to 6.1 and after 10 hours I got a
nice panic. Does this look like some tty problem ?
It looks like a tty or devfs problem.
This is the machine which made that many problems with PREEMTION enabled in
earlier
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Martin Blapp wrote:
As I understand it, spltty() is now a no-op. Does this mean that this code
is now essentially running without any locks that were used to serialise
changes to struct tty in days gone by? Or is the whole tty subsystem still
running under Giant?
I
On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, Pete French wrote:
'k, I'm starting to get the impression that FreeBSD 6.x is evil ... at
least as far as Dual-PIII servers are concerned ... on a machine that,
I can't comment on your other problems - but I have a dual PIII server and
say a 30% performance increase
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I'm also running 6.x on several dual-PIII without problems. An issue local
to Marc's setup is definitely indicated. Given the failure mode, I would
be worried about a potential hardware issue, although subtle hardware and
subtle system software
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Stanislaw Halik wrote:
6.1-STABLE crashed on me. I'm providing a backtrace. Could any of you,
experienced people, suggest me if it's a hardware problem or is it an error
inside the OS?
This is a known bug in the TCP code; a large set of outstanding changes is
present in
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Stanislaw Halik wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
6.1-STABLE crashed on me. I'm providing a backtrace. Could any of you,
experienced people, suggest me if it's a hardware problem or is it an
error inside the OS?
This is a known bug in the TCP code; a large
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Fabian Keil wrote:
There was a request for Tor related problem reports a while ago, I
couldn't find the message again, but I believe it was posted here.
I'm very interested in tracking down this problem, but have had a lot of
trouble getting reliable reports of problems
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Peter Thoenen wrote:
--- Fabian Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There was a request for Tor related problem reports
a while ago, I couldn't find the message again, but I
believe it was posted here.
Is anyone on this list running a Tor node on FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE
or later
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I think this is a useful activity, especially if you've already run
extensive memory testing on the box. If you haven't yet done that, I
encourage you to take a break from buildworld's and make sure the memory
tests pass. I spent several months
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Fabian Keil wrote:
Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Are there any warnings on the console from WITNESS or other
debugging options?
I just got:
Jun 28 23:01:19 tor kernel: lock order reversal:
Jun 28 23:01:19 tor kernel: 1st 0xc3795000 kqueue (kqueue) @
/usr
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
'k, now that I'm up to 3 6-STABLE servers that are deadlocking, I'm spending
time with the remote tech today to get a serial console put online ... how
do I drop into DDB remotely, where the serial console is going through a
Portmaster Terminal
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
Following hte instructions in the Handbook, I've added the following line to
my kernel config:
device sio1 at isa? port IO_COM2 flags 0x10 irq 3
but, when I try to build it:
config: /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/kernel:71: syntax error
*** Error code 1
so,
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
'k, now that I'm up to 3 6-STABLE servers that are deadlocking, I'm
spending time with the remote tech today to get a serial console put
online ... how do I drop
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
Instead of changing your kernel config, edit the sio1 entries in
/boot/device.hints. (This assumes you left device sio in your kernel -- if
not, you need to re-add it).
'k, re-adding ... and I take it there is no more 'DDB_UNATTENDED' option?
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Fabian Keil wrote:
I wish I could. The machine died before I read your message.
I was logged in on the serial console running tail -f /var/log/messages.
Last messages were:
Jun 29 00:42:20 tor kernel: Memory modified after free 0xc4275000(2048)
val=a020c0de @
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
Instead of changing your kernel config, edit the sio1 entries in
/boot/device.hints. (This assumes you left device sio in your kernel --
if not, you need to re-add
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Jonathan Noack wrote:
Please don't top-post...
User Freebsd wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
Just got this on the console of one of hte servers that has been causing
problems ...
Expensive timeout(9) function:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006, Stanislaw Halik wrote:
Per my earlier e-mail, I had hoped to merge a larger set of changes from
HEAD that resolve the underlying problem here (that inpcb's can be detached
from a socket while the socket is still in use), but right now I'm
deferring merging those changes
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Ren Zhen wrote:
After I login, press Ctrl+Alt+ESC, kernel says:
KDB: enter: manual escape to debugger
[thread pid 16 tid 100014 ]
Stopped at kdb_enter+0x2b: nop
db
Then, my T23 lock up. I can only switch off the computer.
But, I use boot -d at booting kdb will work
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Fabian Keil wrote:
I'm very interested in tracking down this problem, but have had a lot of
trouble getting reliable reports of problems -- i.e., ones where I could
get any debugging information. I had a similar conversation on these lines
yeterday with Roger (Tor
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Fabian Keil wrote:
Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Fabian Keil wrote:
After manually triggering a test panic through debug.kdb.enter I
could enter ddb and everything seemed to be working.
However today I got another hang and couldn't enter
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Kostik Belousov wrote:
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:50:11AM -0400, Francisco Reyes wrote:
Kostik Belousov writes:
Since nobody except you experience that problems (at least, only you
notified
about the problem existence)
Did you miss the part of:
User Freebsd writes:
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Stanislaw Halik wrote:
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
Thanks for testing the patch -- it looks like there's a more pressing
logical problem in this code! Could you try the following simpler patch:
http://www.watson.org/~robert/freebsd/netperf
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Michael Collette wrote:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=80389
If you locally back out the referenced change lock_proc.c:1.18 in rpc.lockd on
the server, do things improve?
Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Scott Long wrote:
For what it's worth, I recently spent a lot of time putting FreeBSD 6.1 to
the test as both an NFS client and server in a mixed OS environment. By far
and away, the biggest problems that I encountered with it were due to linux
NFS bugs. CentOS, FC, and
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Danny Braniss wrote:
In my case our main servers are NetApp, and the problems are more related to
am-utils running into some race condition (need more time to debug this :-)
the other problem is related to throughput, freebsd is slower than linux,
and while freebsd/nfs/tcp
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Kostik Belousov wrote:
Also, the both lockd processes now put identification information in the
proctitle (srv and kern). SIGUSR1 shall be sent to srv process.
Hmm, after looking at the dump there and some code reading, I have noted the
following:
1. NLM lock request
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Michael Collette wrote:
-
Let's start with the simplest. The scenario here involves 2 machines, mach01
and mach02. Both are running 6-STABLE, and both are running rpcbind,
rpc.statd, and rpc.lockd.
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Francisco Reyes wrote:
can you trigger it using work on just one client against a server, without
client-client interactions? This makes tracking and reproduction a lot
easier
Personally I am experiencing two problems.
1- NFS clients freeze/hang if the server goes away.
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Max Laier wrote:
On Thursday 06 July 2006 02:02, Vye Wilson wrote:
I'm really not sure how to go about troubleshooting this issue. Can someone
point me in the right direction?
vmstat -i should give a good idea what is causing the interrupt load.
I also highly recommend
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Bradley W. Dutton wrote:
I get the below panic when rebuilding a graid3 array. Is this indicative of
a hardware or software problem? Or is some of the data on my array corrupt
and I should just rebuild the array? I searched on google and didn't find
much.
panic:
On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
I just left a tcpdump -n arp host 10.10.64.40 on a third machine
sniffing around and tested all em module versions I had (the stock 6.1,
6-STABLE and 6-STABLE with your patch), but got silence on all three:
That's odd. I've tested it on CURRENT
On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
I think that I have patched, built and loaded the em(4) kernel module
correctly. After applying the patch there were no rejects, before building
the module I intentionally appended (patched) to its version string in
if_em.c, and could see that in
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Johan Ström wrote:
And now again... raid gone degraded only 2 days after reboot!
Jul 12 22:22:50 elfi kernel: ad4: FAILURE - device detached
Jul 12 22:22:50 elfi kernel: subdisk4: detached
Jul 12 22:22:50 elfi kernel: ad4: detached
Jul 12 22:22:50 elfi kernel:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Dominic Marks wrote:
Two panics, I've just had:
I had just installed a fresh world+kernel, booted and then received the
first panic. Then reset, booted again and shortly received the second
(although they look identical to me). At the moment everything seems fine,
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
Also note that under FreeBSD 4.x, all three of these machines were pretty
much my more solid machines, with even more vServers running on them then
I'm able to run with 6.x ... once I got rid of using unionfs, stability
skyrocketed :(
Hr ...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
Yes, this was going to be my next question -- if you're seeing wedges under
load and there's a common controller in use, maybe we're looking at a
driver bug. Bugs of those sort typically look a lot like what you
describe: an I/O is lost and so
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, User Freebsd wrote:
'k, first question is with the core file provide any insight into this? ie.
provide further confirmation that it looks like the driver vs file system?
Quite possibly, yes.
second question, who is currently maintaining the iir driver? I've CC'd
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, Holtor wrote:
Since upgrading some of our 5.4 servers to the latest 6.1-STABLE we've had
some processes stuck in the *inp state as listed in 'top'. Those processes
can't be killed and any resources they use up in terms of bound IP addresses
or ports can't be freed. Does
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
I just had a kernel panic. This happened seconds after I started a reboot
using alt-ctl-del, at about the time just after it it said it was writing
the entropy file.
Here is the kernel config file, the results of the dump, and dmesg. Do
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Stephane Dupille wrote:
I have a computer running FreeBSD 6.1.
As time passing by, the memory fills up. When the machine starts, memory is
occupied to 30 %, and after two or three weeks memory is occupied to 100 %
and it begins to use swap.
It is inactive pages
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Graham Menhennitt wrote:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
current process = 479 (mountd)
I have the same panic reproducibly. Shutting off nfs_server_enable (i.e.
mountd) in rc.conf prevents it. This is with 6-STABLE cvsupped yesterday.
I'll get some
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Graham Menhennitt wrote:
Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
current process = 479 (mountd)
I have the same panic reproducibly. Shutting off nfs_server_enable (i.e.
mountd) in rc.conf prevents it. This is with 6
Dear 6-STABLE users,
In the next 2-3 weeks, I plan to MFC support for CAPP security eventing
auditing from 7-CURRENT to 6-STABLE. The implementation has been running
quite nicely in -CURRENT for several months. Right now, I'm just waiting on a
confirmation from Sun regarding formal
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Václav Haisman wrote:
I found this in logs of 6.1 box that I admin this morning. The machine keeps
running after that.
Indeed, there does appear to be a problem in the TCP socket option code with
respect to performing copyin/copyout while holding the inpcb lock. This
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
Dear 6-STABLE users,
In the next 2-3 weeks, I plan to MFC support for CAPP security eventing
auditing from 7-CURRENT to 6-STABLE. The implementation has been running
quite nicely in -CURRENT for several months. Right now, I'm just waiting
On Sat, 2 Sep 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
After a couple of weeks of settling, polishing, etc, the MFC of audit
support is about to begin. Over the next couple of days, the 6-STABLE build
may be briefly broken as inter-dependent components are merged. I do not
anticipate any serious
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Marcelo Gardini do Amaral wrote:
I would like to discuss a little bit more about UDP performance. I've made
some tests and the results may have some value here.
In this test is easy to see that there is something different in the FreeBSD
6 branch.
I made a benchmark
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Marcelo Gardini do Amaral wrote:
I would like to discuss a little bit more about UDP performance. I've made
some tests and the results may have some value here.
In this test is easy to see that there is something different
Dear all,
I've just comitted a fix to syscalls.master and regenerated the remaining
system call files, which should correct the auditctl: Invalid Argument error
being returned by auditd. In short order, this fix should be on the cvsup
mirrors -- please let me know if it resolves the problem
On Sun, 17 Sep 2006, Eugene Kazarinov wrote:
Since 6.1 I have stopped using polling as a regular kernel seems to give
good performance as compared to polling mode. In fact I used to get
anything between 55-75megs/sec on 6.1 with regular cables but since
upgraded to cat6 quality Ethernet
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Ganbold wrote:
#
# $P4: //depot/projects/trustedbsd/openbsm/etc/audit_user#3 $
# $FreeBSD: src/contrib/openbsm/etc/audit_user,v 1.2.2.1 2006/09/02 10:46:00
rwatson Exp $
#
#root:lo:no
root:all:no
I'm bit confused here I thought auditd should log all activities, but I
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Ganbold wrote:
Strange, there are still no logs in /var/audit dir :( Even tried to use your
config, no success. However when I logged on to my desktop from console to
itself (ssh -l tsgan localhost) it starts logging. But why it is not logging
when I'm on console?
Are
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Ganbold wrote:
Robert Watson wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Ganbold wrote:
Strange, there are still no logs in /var/audit dir :( Even tried to use
your config, no success. However when I logged on to my desktop from
console to itself (ssh -l tsgan localhost) it starts
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Ingo wrote:
I`ve some problems with the network performance on my Soekris NET 4801.
(Freebsd 6.1 release-p3)
When I start netio on the soekris and do a netio localhost, I get about
8.4 MB/sec, and when I start with netio 192.168.0.11(it´s localhost
address) I get only
MTU does OpenBSD use on its loopback interface as compared to the
network interface?
Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge
Greetings
Am 18.09.2006, 15:52 Uhr, schrieb Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Ingo wrote:
I`ve some problems
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Krassimir Slavchev wrote:
When I try to generate random bytes using rand() or random() functions I
found that these functions return constant values!?
Sounds pretty odd -- even if not explicitly seeded, you should be getting
something pseudo-random, even if what you get
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Joerg Pernfuss wrote:
On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:19:03 +0100 (BST)
Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just comitted a fix to syscalls.master and regenerated the remaining
system call files, which should correct the auditctl: Invalid Argument
error being returned
On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
Right now the id(1) command in -STABLE doesn't print audit properties of the
process, but I've attached a patch that causes it to do so when id -a is
run. If you could apply this patch and run id -a as root, that would be
helpful.
I've merged
, 29 Sep 2006 22:41:55 + (UTC)
From: Robert Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: cvs commit: src/contrib/openbsm HISTORY TODO VERSION configure
configure.ac src/contrib/openbsm/bin/audit audit.c
src/contrib/openbsm/bin/auditd
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006, Scott Long wrote:
David G Lawrence wrote:
Attached is a simple user program that will immediately cause pretty
much
all of the network drivers (at least the ones I own) to stop working and
get watchdog timeouts.
I am runnign this on a single processor machine with an
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, David G Lawrence wrote:
Are you enabling an option, like IPv6, that puts Giant over the network
stack?
From dmesg:
WARNING: debug.mpsafenet forced to 0 as ipsec requires Giant
WARNING: MPSAFE network stack disabled, expect reduced performance.
...the kernel has
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:36:22PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
When this kind of thing happens you just need to periodically make a bit of
noise to make sure it doesn't get forgotten. In particular you should
mention the problem to re@ so they can
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:30:09AM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
When this kind of thing happens you just need to periodically make a bit
of noise to make sure it doesn't get forgotten. In particular you should
mention the problem to re@ so they can
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
Your 4.x system is not doing to die when we EOL 4.x. We're only
saying that it is not going to see any additional work on it in
the official FreeBSD repository.
Actually, we're not even saying that. We're just saying that it will no
longer be
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Simon L. Nielsen wrote:
On 2006.10.12 10:59:18 +0300, Patrick Okui wrote:
One of my servers is colocated in a place on a different continent - which
is why I haven't been able to upgrade it beyond RELENG_4. Google turns up a
binary upgrade as the only way I can get to
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Chris Laco wrote:
Just a lurker, and FreeBSD users since late 3.0... From my personal
experience of (4) 4.x machines and (1) 5.x machine, all on the same
hardware, I've had more problems with my 5.x install than I ever did with my
4.x install. I'm afraid to even look to
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Edward B. DREGER wrote:
Perhaps work on 7 should have been delayed until 5 and 6 were able to woo
people away from 4 -- or at least not leave valid reasons for people wanting
to stay behind. (Note that I'm more sympathetic than my tone might
indicate; I've also gotten
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 09:59:10AM -0400, Vivek Khera wrote:
On Oct 11, 2006, at 6:36 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
I think the most likely path of success is, as you say, to make the
4.x
userland more like 6.x.
For anyone who really wishes to stick to
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
I am all for it.
According to this thread, it appears the 4.x branch is still used for
whatever reasons, may they be perceived good or bad depends on one's own
consideration and feeling. If the FreeBSD Project is going to relinquish
RELENG_4
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, security wrote:
You'll have the sources. If you're using 4.11 in a business, you need to
decide if it's more cost effective to move on to 6 or hire someone to keep
4.11 running. There's compat_4 to keep most userland apps happy. I'm sure
you could argue the various
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Randy Bush wrote:
do folk actually successfully upgrade
# uname -a
FreeBSD psg.com 5.5-STABLE FreeBSD 5.5-STABLE #15: Sun Oct 1 18:41:24 GMT 2006
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PSG i386
to RELENG_6 *safely* on a many-user production system using the
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, Paul Allen wrote:
While possibly not advisable in the long term, I ran a 4.x postfix and
cyrus server install on 6.x using compat4 for about six months without
problems. The place where it gets tricky is updating the 4.x binaries,
which requires a 4.x chroot, since I was
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Erwin Lansing wrote:
I haven't seen a report on this before, although I heard other people being
hit by the same problem before. Doing a fresh install from a BETA2 cd
forgets to install the kernel and modules to disk. Everything else is
installed just fine, so a simple
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 08:48:20PM -0500, Jeremy Messenger wrote:
I guess I am safe then as I can ignore these cores.. Thanks! Isn't kernel
supposed to be avoid the crash? I don't see any of crash before I upgraded
to last night of RELENG_6.
It's
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Stefan Bethke wrote:
We're consistely getting this panic even under smallish loads. I've
experimented with various values for VM_KMEM_SIZE_MAX (384, 512, 768 and
1024 MB), but the boxes are still panicking after even short periods (a few
hours) just doing a buildworld,
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Scott Long wrote:
There are no obvious culprits from what you posted. The kernel was only
trying to allocate 60 bytes, and the 64-byte bucket didn't look to be overly
used. None of the other zones look terribly over-used either. The 'show
malloc' command doesn't really
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Robert Watson wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Scott Long wrote:
There are no obvious culprits from what you posted. The kernel was only
trying to allocate 60 bytes, and the 64-byte bucket didn't look to be
overly used. None of the other zones look terribly over-used
On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Stefan Bethke wrote:
acpica 3024 159K 20026966
...
db show uma
Zone AllocsFrees UsedCache
64 9990754 9986054 4700 9980755
Looks like acpica has gone crazy performing
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
Just a quick note to say that as part of the FreeBSD-6.0 Release Cycle
the RELENG_6 branch tag has just been created in the CVS repository.
In preparation for the release some places in the tree now say that this
branch is -STABLE but there is still work
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Yann Golanski wrote:
Quoth Scott Long on Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 09:18:50 -0600
Part of the purpose of moving quickly on to RELENG_6 is so that the
migration work for users from 5.x to 6.x is very small. 6.x is really
just an evolutionary step from 5.x, not the
.
Robert Watson confirmed this to be an issue on the 10th of April.
You might have to wait until 6.0-R since fixing it seems to require
infrastructure changes that cannot easily be backported to 5.x.
With all due respect - if this is (and I'm assuming it is, because it
happens on all the servers I'm
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Steve wrote:
I've found tons of emails, news messages, listserv messages, and even
some bug reports of this seemingly common error.
So, I had been running 5.2 on a server, and, updated to 5.3. Got the
READ_DMA and WRITE_DMA error and retries. So, figuring it might be a
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Alexey Yakimovich wrote:
My advice to FreeBSD release engineering team:
- do more testing;
- have it tested with hardware what was published in Hardware Notes;
- do not release it for production if it is not in production quality;
- reread again what was written by
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Eirik Øverby wrote:
I've only seen the issue when logging out of a serial console session,
and had previously hypothesized that it had to do with the simultaneous
timing of a console message from syslog and the opening/closing of the
console's tty due to logging out and
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Marc Olzheim wrote:
Indeed. That's why my company started taking FreeBSD 5.3 in use for
production servers when it was out. Since then numerous bugs were fixed,
some of which reported by us. Now that we're X bug fixes later in time
and started to get a good feeling about
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Nicklas B. Westerlund wrote:
Although I havn't seen any major problems on our servers, all using u320
scsi and smp - I don't feel as secure about my choice of upgrading to
5.x. We still have some 4.x servers in production, and judging by how
this is evolving, I think I'll
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Joao Barros wrote:
I was hopping for you to mention user's feedback. I started this thread
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2005-July/052288.html
back with SNAP004. The problem is still present in BETA1. I haven't seen
any more advances in the thread,
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, MikeM wrote:
Your comment presupposes that most of the bugs are specific to one piece
of hardware, I doubt that is a valid assertion. I would offer that most
of the bugs are not present in source code specific to a certain piece
of hardware, but are present in source
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Benjamin Lutz wrote:
While tracking an issue with a jail I run, the interface to which the
jail aliases it's IP to suddenly became unresponsive.
My script starts the jail, then runs ifconfig alias. After starting and
stopping the jail about 20 times, the interface
1 - 100 of 564 matches
Mail list logo
