Re: Kernel panic on 6.1: init dies under load
Hi Dan, That's good news, thanks for testing! I've updated the diff slightly. Unfortunately I couldn't figure out what's causing "boot dump" to crash. I've exercised coredump, physio and read-ahead codepaths. I'll commit the diff next week unless there's going to be reports of some breakage. The diff is available from the same location as previously: http://gir.theapt.org/~mike/xbf.diff Thanks for testing! On 27 May 2017 at 03:33, Dan Cross wrote: > Thanks for this latest patch; it seems to help. At least, I was able to > put a fairly significant amount of load on the machine with out a panic. > I'll try and load it up more and see where we get, but so far this is > positive. > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Mike Belopuhov > wrote: > >> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 12:27 -0400, Dan Cross wrote: >> > Thanks for the patch; I just got a few minutes today and I applied it, >> > rebuilt and installed the kernel and rebooted. Sadly, I get a similar >> > panic. Attached is a screenshot of console output. Note that, 'boot >> sync' >> > from ddb hangs forever. >> > >> > - Dan C. >> >> That's OK. I've discovered more problems related to 64k transfers. >> The reason why we didn't notice anything bad when aborting sleep >> was because sleep has a small memory footprint, but if you dump >> core of a larger (> 64k) program, you'd notice the issue because >> core dump routine like some other places in the kernel assumes >> that 64k transfers always work. >> >> I've attempted to attack this problem from a different angle: >> ensure that xbf(4) can handle 64k transfers. Solutions to this >> problem are notoriously messy and complicated and so far this >> one is no exception. Today I got to the point where the system >> boots multiuser but couldn't test further. I've noticed however >> that "boot dump" from ddb still crashes so I know it's not 100% >> right just yet, but since I won't get around doing anything >> about this until early next week, I'd appreciate a quick test >> if possible. >> >> I'm not attaching the diff since it's rather large: >> >> http://gir.theapt.org/~mike/xbf.diff >> >> Cheers, >> Mike >> > >
[patch] macppc/machdep.c: fix typo, no -> not
The struggle is very real when you're getting kernel panics, but the struggle needn't have typos. -- Scott Cheloha Index: sys/arch/macppc/macppc/machdep.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/macppc/macppc/machdep.c,v retrieving revision 1.180 diff -u -p -r1.180 machdep.c --- sys/arch/macppc/macppc/machdep.c30 Apr 2017 16:45:45 - 1.180 +++ sys/arch/macppc/macppc/machdep.c3 Jun 2017 14:20:04 - @@ -712,7 +712,7 @@ dumpsys() printf(str, error); #else - printf("dumpsys() - no yet supported\n"); + printf("dumpsys() - not yet supported\n"); #endif delay(500); /* 5 seconds */
Re: a strange set of HUGE bugs
On 2017/06/03 11:21, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 11:10:29PM -0400, Daniel Russell wrote: > > on both the amd64 and i386 versions the manual and alot of the config files > > are missing and noone not even root has root permissions (note that i'm > > using the flash drive version of both and using the filesets that come with > > them) > > > > because of the nature of the releases i had to use different machines > > > > amd64: latitude-d630 > > cpu: intel core2 duo cpu t7100 @ 1.80ghz x 2 (gotten from > > ubuntu)(integrated) > > (integrated) gpu: intel 965GM x86/MMX/SSE2 > > > > i386 (i have much less information about this one) > > another in the latitude series but this time with a pentium m cpu (and > > that's the extent of my knowledge) > > > > both had the exact same problem and seemingly had no fix whatsoever because > > i couldn't run bsd.rd > > Please focus on a single problem per bug report and provide a very clear > description of the issue. If you don't even bother to include a dmesg > nobody will take your report seriously. > See http://www.openbsd.org/report.html for the proper procedure to follow. > yep. Start with saying *exactly* what you are trying to run. What is "the flash drive version"?
Re: a strange set of HUGE bugs
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 11:10:29PM -0400, Daniel Russell wrote: > on both the amd64 and i386 versions the manual and alot of the config files > are missing and noone not even root has root permissions (note that i'm > using the flash drive version of both and using the filesets that come with > them) > > because of the nature of the releases i had to use different machines > > amd64: latitude-d630 > cpu: intel core2 duo cpu t7100 @ 1.80ghz x 2 (gotten from > ubuntu)(integrated) > (integrated) gpu: intel 965GM x86/MMX/SSE2 > > i386 (i have much less information about this one) > another in the latitude series but this time with a pentium m cpu (and > that's the extent of my knowledge) > > both had the exact same problem and seemingly had no fix whatsoever because > i couldn't run bsd.rd Please focus on a single problem per bug report and provide a very clear description of the issue. If you don't even bother to include a dmesg nobody will take your report seriously. See http://www.openbsd.org/report.html for the proper procedure to follow.