truss -f timeout 2 sleep 10 causes breakage

2024-03-27 Thread Mateusz Guzik
on It does react to -9 though. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: libc/libsys split coming soon

2024-02-03 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 2/3/24, David Chisnall wrote: > On 3 Feb 2024, at 09:15, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >> Binary startup is very slow, for example execve of a hello world >> binary in a Linux-based chroot on FreeBSD is faster by a factor of 2 >> compared to a native one. As such perf-

Re: libc/libsys split coming soon

2024-02-03 Thread Mateusz Guzik
is faster by a factor of 2 compared to a native one. As such perf-wise this looks like a step in the wrong direction. Is there a problem making it so that libc ends up unchanged, but all the bits are available separately in libsys if one does not want libc? -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: crash zfs_clone_range()

2023-11-14 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 11/14/23, Rick Macklem wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:46 AM Alexander Motin wrote: >> >> On 14.11.2023 12:44, Alexander Motin wrote: >> > On 14.11.2023 12:39, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >> One of the vnodes is probably not zfs, I suspect this will do i

Re: crash zfs_clone_range()

2023-11-14 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 11/14/23, Alexander Motin wrote: > On 14.11.2023 12:44, Alexander Motin wrote: >> On 14.11.2023 12:39, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>> One of the vnodes is probably not zfs, I suspect this will do it >>> (untested): >>> >>> diff --git a/sys/contrib/openz

Re: crash zfs_clone_range()

2023-11-14 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 11/14/23, Alexander Motin wrote: > On 14.11.2023 12:39, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> One of the vnodes is probably not zfs, I suspect this will do it >> (untested): >> >> diff --git a/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c >> b/sys/cont

Re: crash zfs_clone_range()

2023-11-14 Thread Mateusz Guzik
ction or under mutex > cpuid = 2 > time = 1699966486 > KDB: stack backtrace: > db_trace_self() at db_trace_self > db_trace_self_wrapper() at db_trace_self_wrapper+0x38 > vpanic() at vpanic+0x1a0 > panic() at panic+0x48 > data_abort() at data_abort+0x2fc > handle_el1h_sync() at handle_el1h_sync+0x18 > --- exception, esr 0x9604 > rms_rlock() at rms_rlock+0x1c > zfs_clone_range() at zfs_clone_range+0x68 > zfs_freebsd_copy_file_range() at zfs_freebsd_copy_file_range+0x19c > null_bypass() at null_bypass+0x118 > vn_copy_file_range() at vn_copy_file_range+0x1c0 > kern_copy_file_range() at kern_copy_file_range+0x36c > sys_copy_file_range() at sys_copy_file_range+0x8c > do_el0_sync() at do_el0_sync+0x634 > handle_el0_sync() at handle_el0_sync+0x48 > --- exception, esr 0x5600 > KDB: enter: panic > [ thread pid 3620 tid 100911 ] > Stopped at kdb_enter+0x48: str xzr, [x19, #768] > db> > > This happens as soon as I start poudriere in a jenkins-agent jail. > > AFAIK this includes the two recent vn_copy_file_range changes of > Konstantin. > > Next I will install a GENERIC kernel instead of GENERIC-NODEBUG. > One of the vnodes is probably not zfs, I suspect this will do it (untested): diff --git a/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c b/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c index 107cd69c756c..e799a7091b8e 100644 --- a/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c +++ b/sys/contrib/openzfs/module/os/freebsd/zfs/zfs_vnops_os.c @@ -6270,6 +6270,11 @@ zfs_freebsd_copy_file_range(struct vop_copy_file_range_args *ap) goto bad_write_fallback; } } + + if (invp->v_mount->mnt_vfc != outvp->v_mount->mnt_vfc) { + goto bad_write_fallback; + } + if (invp == outvp) { if (vn_lock(outvp, LK_EXCLUSIVE) != 0) { goto bad_write_fallback; -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: kernel 100% CPU

2023-10-16 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 10/14/23, Graham Perrin wrote: > On 03/09/2023 20:25, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > >> … >> >> Sorry mate, neglected to specify: collect sysctl -a once you run into >> the problem. >> >> Once I look at that I'm probably going to ship some debug patches to

Re: Continually count the number of open files

2023-09-14 Thread Mateusz Guzik
an implementation which avoids being a problem. That is to say, a laptop-scale API can probably be implemented as is, but solution which can provide reliable events (not to be confused with reliably notifying about all events) would require numerous changes. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-09-04 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 9/4/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-28 22:33, schrieb Alexander Leidinger: >> Am 2023-08-22 18:59, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >>> On 8/22/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>>> Am 2023-08-21 10:53, schrieb Konstantin Belousov: >>>>> On Mon

Re: kernel 100% CPU

2023-09-03 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 9/3/23, Graham Perrin wrote: > On 03/09/2023 17:55, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 9/3/23, Graham Perrin wrote: >>> On 02/09/2023 18:31, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>>> On 9/2/23, Graham Perrin wrote: >>>>> … I began the trace /after/ the issue became

Re: kernel 100% CPU

2023-09-03 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 9/3/23, Graham Perrin wrote: > On 02/09/2023 18:31, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 9/2/23, Graham Perrin wrote: >>> … I began the trace /after/ the issue became observable. >>> Will it be more meaningful to begin a trace and then reproduce the issue >>> (before

Re: kernel 100% CPU

2023-09-03 Thread Mateusz Guzik
70p-freebsd:/home/grahamperrin/Documents/IT/BSD/FreeBSD/kernel-cpu > The script is intended to run when you have git executing for a long time. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: kernel 100% CPU, and ports-mgmt/poudriere-devel 'Inspecting ports tree for modifications to git checkout...' for an extraordinarily long time

2023-09-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 9/2/23, Graham Perrin wrote: > On 02/09/2023 10:17, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 9/2/23, Graham Perrin wrote: >>> Some inspections are extraordinarily time-consuming. Others complete >>> very quickly, as they should. >>> >>> One recent inspection too

Re: 100% CPU time for sysctl command, not killable

2023-09-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
basic profiling tooling immediately shows the issue, in this case for example: pmcstat -S inst_retired.any_p -TI > Bye, > Alexander. > > -- > http://www.Leidinger.net alexan...@leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF > http://www.FreeBSD.orgnetch...@freebsd.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: kernel 100% CPU, and ports-mgmt/poudriere-devel 'Inspecting ports tree for modifications to git checkout...' for an extraordinarily long time

2023-09-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/sys/GENERIC-NODEBUG > > amd64 150 150 > % > > > get a flamegraph with dtrace https://github.com/brendangregg/FlameGraph -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Panic with 15.0-CURRENT

2023-08-25 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/25/23, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 8/25/23, Yasuhiro Kimura wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I made regular update of my amd64 system from main-n264870-e5e6a865358 >> to main-n265022-1554ba03b65 and system crashed with panic while >> building packages with poudr

Re: Panic with 15.0-CURRENT

2023-08-25 Thread Mateusz Guzik
bsd.org/~yasu/FreeBSD-15-CURRENT-amd64-main-n265022-1554ba03b65.20230825.panic.png > this is a fallout from the recent timerfd commit. I'll fix it in few. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: poudriere bulk with ZFS and USE_TMPFS=no on main [14-ALPHA2 based]: extensive vlruwk for cpdup's on new builders after pkg builds in first builder

2023-08-23 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/24/23, Mark Millard wrote: > On Aug 23, 2023, at 15:10, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > >> On 8/23/23, Mark Millard wrote: >>> [Forked off the ZFS deadlock 14 discussion, per feedback.] >>> >>> On Aug 23, 2023, at 11:40, Alexander Motin wrote: >>&

Re: poudriere bulk with ZFS and USE_TMPFS=no on main [14-ALPHA2 based]: extensive vlruwk for cpdup's on new builders after pkg builds in first builder

2023-08-23 Thread Mateusz Guzik
ftdi.ko > 17 1 0xffff83b56000 4e58 ucom.ko > 181 0x83b5b000 3360 wmt.ko > 191 0x83b5f000 e268 ng_l2cap.ko > 201 0x83b6e0001bf68 ng_btsocket.ko > 211 0x83b8a000 38f8 ng_socket.ko > 221 0x83b8e000 3250 filemon.ko > 231 0x83b92000 4758 nullfs.ko > 241 0x83b97000 73c0 linprocfs.ko > 253 0x83b9f000 be70 linux_common.ko > 261 0x83bab000 3558 fdescfs.ko > 271 0x83baf00031b20 linux.ko > 281 0x83be10002ed40 linux64.ko > > > Note that before the "Cleaning up" notice, the vfs.freevnodes > shows as being around (for example) 2210796. But after > "Exiting with status": 61362. vfs.vnodes_created has a > similar staging of in the ball park of up to 1343 but > then the change to: 20135479. Similarly, vfs.numvnodes > 2216564 -> 59860. > > > > Anything else I should gather and report as basic information? > This is a known problem, but it is unclear if you should be running into it in this setup. Can you try again but this time *revert* 138a5dafba312ff39ce0eefdbe34de95519e600d, like so: git revert 138a5dafba312ff39ce0eefdbe34de95519e600d may want to switch to a different branch first, for example: git checkout -b vfstesting -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-22 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/22/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-21 10:53, schrieb Konstantin Belousov: >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 08:19:28AM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>> Am 2023-08-20 23:17, schrieb Konstantin Belousov: >>> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 11:07:0

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-20 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/20/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-20 22:02, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >> On 8/20/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>> Am 2023-08-20 19:10, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >>>> On 8/18/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>> >>>>> I h

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-20 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/20/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-20 19:10, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >> On 8/18/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > >>> I have a 51MB text file, compressed to about 1MB. Are you interested >>> to >>> get it? >>> >> >>

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-20 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/18/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-16 18:48, schrieb Alexander Leidinger: >> Am 2023-08-15 23:29, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >>> On 8/15/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>>> Am 2023-08-15 14:41, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >>>> >&

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/18/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-16 18:48, schrieb Alexander Leidinger: >> Am 2023-08-15 23:29, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >>> On 8/15/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>>> Am 2023-08-15 14:41, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: >>>> >&

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/15/23, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Am 2023-08-15 14:41, schrieb Mateusz Guzik: > >> With this in mind can you provide: sysctl kern.maxvnodes >> vfs.wantfreevnodes vfs.freevnodes vfs.vnodes_created vfs.numvnodes >> vfs.recycles_free vfs.recycles > > After a rebo

Re: ZFS deadlock in 14

2023-08-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/15/23, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Mateusz Guzik writes: >> Given that the custom reproducer failed I think the most prudent >> course of action is to reproduce again with poudriere, but this time >> arrange to have all stacktraces dumped. > > Why? What m

Re: ZFS deadlock in 14

2023-08-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
ddb/ddb.conf:script kdb.enter.panic=textdump set; capture on; run lockinfo; show pcpu; bt; ps; alltrace; capture off; textdump dump; reset it is a slightly finicky beast so I would trigger a panic by hand first to validate it works as expected. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Speed improvements in ZFS

2023-08-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
s vfs.wantfreevnodes vfs.freevnodes vfs.vnodes_created vfs.numvnodes vfs.recycles_free vfs.recycles Meanwhile if there is tons of recycles, you can damage control by bumping kern.maxvnodes. If this is not the problem you can use dtrace to figure it out. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: confusion about root partition causes panic during startup

2023-07-20 Thread Mateusz Guzik
it() at start_init+0x23/frame 0xfe006d3baef0 > fork_exit() at fork_exit+0x82/frame 0xfe006d3baf30 > fork_trampoline() at fork_trampoline+0xe/frame 0xfe006d3baf30 > --- trap 0x5c035c02, rip = 0x680c680c680c680c, rsp = 0x1b6b1f6b1b6b1b6b, rbp > = 0x4eb54eb54eb54eb5 --- > KDB: enter: panic > [ thread pid 1 tid 12 ] > Stopped at kdb_enter+0x32: movq$0,0xde7643(%rip) > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: another crash and going forward with zfs

2023-04-24 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/18/23, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > On 4/18/23 05:14, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 4/17/23, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: >>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but from my understanding there were zero >>> problems with block cloning when it wasn't in use or now disabl

Re: Problem compiling py-* ports

2023-04-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
> 'MetadataPathFinder' > > ERROR Backend subprocess exited when trying to invoke > get_requires_for_build_wheel > *** Error code 1 > > Stop. > make: stopped in /usr/ports/textproc/py-pygments > > ===>>> make build failed for textproc/py-pygments@py39 > ===>>> Aborting update > > ===>>> Update for textproc/py-pygments@py39 failed > ===>>> Aborting update > > > ===>>> You can restart from the point of failure with this command line: > > > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: another crash and going forward with zfs

2023-04-17 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/17/23, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > On 4/18/23 03:51, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> After bugfixes got committed I decided to zpool upgrade and sysctl >> vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled=1 vs poudriere for testing purposes. I very >> quickly got a new crash: >> >> pani

another crash and going forward with zfs

2023-04-17 Thread Mateusz Guzik
ort though) to prevent RW usage of the current pools with it enabled. Comments? -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75

2023-04-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
thers who have had poudriere and other issues. I >> never had any problems with poudriere on top of the new ZFS. >> >> WRT reverting block_cloning pools to without, your only option is to >> backup >> your pool and recreate it without block_cloning. Then restore your data. >> >> > > All right, I interpret the answer that way, that I need a most recent source > tree (and > accordingly built and installed OS) AND a patch that isn't officially > commited? > > On a box I'm with: > > FreeBSD 14.0-CURRENT #8 main-n262175-5ee1c90e50ce: Sat Apr 15 07:57:16 CEST > 2023 amd64 > > The box is crashing while trying to update ports with the well known issue: > > Panic String: VERIFY(!zil_replaying(zilog, tx)) failed > > At the moment all alarm bells are ringing and I lost track about what has > been patched and > already commited and what is still as patch available but in the phase of > evaluation or > inofficially emmited here. > > According to the EXDEV issue: in cases of poudriere or ports trees on ZFS, > what do I have to > do to ensure that those datasets are clean? The OS should detect file > corruption but in my > case the box is crashing :-( > > I did several times scrubbing, but this seems to be the action of a helpless > and desperate man > ... ;-/ > > Greetings > Using block cloning is still not safe, but somewhere in this thread pjd had a patch to keep it operatinal for already cloned files without adding new ones. Anyhow, as was indicated by vishwin@ there was data corruption *unrelated* to block cloning which also came with the import, I narrowed it down: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/14753 That said now I'm testing a kernel which does not do block cloning and does not have the other problematic commit, we will see if things work. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75

2023-04-13 Thread Mateusz Guzik
dworld > fails) for me to test poudriere bulk -c builds with. I used a world from > https://gitlab.com/vishwin/freebsd-src/-/tree/zfs-revert which consists > of reverting the merge commit plus a few other conflicts, but keeping > vop_fplookup_vexec. > I'm going to narrow down the non-blockcopy corruption after my testjig gets off the ground. Basically I expect to have it sorted out on Friday. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75

2023-04-13 Thread Mateusz Guzik
> >>>> adjusted resend of the original. The To/Cc should >> >>>> be coomplete this time.] >> >>>> >> >>>> On Apr 12, 2023, at 22:52, Cy Schubert = >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>

Re: CURRENT: Panic VERIFY(!zil_replaying(zilog, tx)) failed (and crashing)

2023-04-09 Thread Mateusz Guzik
do not have more to present. > > I rememeber now really scraed that there was a HEADSUP in the list regarding > some serious ZFS > problems - I didn't find it right now. > > Thanks in advance, > That's fallout from the new block cloning feature, adding the author -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75 [separate aarch64 panic for zpool import]

2023-04-08 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/8/23, Kyle Evans wrote: > On Fri, Apr 7, 2023 at 4:54 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >> On 4/7/23, Mark Millard wrote: >> > On Apr 7, 2023, at 14:26, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> > >> >> On 4/7/23, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >>> can you

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75 [separate aarch64 panic for zpool import]

2023-04-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/7/23, Mark Millard wrote: > On Apr 7, 2023, at 14:26, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > >> On 4/7/23, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>> can you try with this: >>> >>> diff --git >>> a/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h >>

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75 [separate aarch64 panic for zpool import]

2023-04-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/7/23, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > can you try with this: > > diff --git > a/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h > b/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h > index 16276b08c759..e1bca9ef140a 100644 > --- a/sys/contrib/ope

Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75 [separate aarch64 panic for zpool import]

2023-04-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
b312b62f908ec92311d1bd8536dbaeb8e55b/arm64/aarch64/kernel.txz > > By contrast, the prior commit had an artifact build > as well, but it's kernel does not get the panic for > zpool import : > > https://artifact.ci.freebsd.org/snapshot/main/b98fbf3781df16f7797b2bbeabf205dc7d4985ae/arm64/aarch64/kernel.txz > > See also: > > https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current/2023-April/003417.html > > === > Mark Millard > marklmi at yahoo.com > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: n262026-37d97b10ff0e installworld failure

2023-04-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
e5bbde0f46a98be5b or later. build and install the new kernel, only then proceed with installworld and you should be fine. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: n262026-37d97b10ff0e installworld failure

2023-04-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
> Any ideas? > > 37d97b10ff0e was around twelve hours ago, > <https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/log/?qt=range=37d97b10ff0e> > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: NanoBSD: CURRENT unable to compile 13-STABLE : ld: error: args.o: Opaque pointers are only supported in -opaque-pointers mode (Producer: 'LLVM15.0.7' Reader: 'LLVM 14.0.5')

2023-03-30 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 3/30/23, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 3/30/23, FreeBSD User wrote: >> Hello folks, >> >> some strange misbehaviour in a NanoBSD compilation is driving me nuts. >> Recently I posted some >> error messages regarding >> >> [...] >> src/sys/dev/an

Re: NanoBSD: CURRENT unable to compile 13-STABLE : ld: error: args.o: Opaque pointers are only supported in -opaque-pointers mode (Producer: 'LLVM15.0.7' Reader: 'LLVM 14.0.5')

2023-03-30 Thread Mateusz Guzik
er from main. in the worst case the commit to turn "function definition without a prototype is deprecated" from errors to warnings could be merged to stable/13 to facilitate the build it may be you will be able to get away with modifying CFLAGS like so: CFLAGS+=-Wno-deprecated-non-prototype in src.conf and/or make.conf -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: oudriere/CURRENT jail upgrade: install error: libc.so.7: Operation not permitted *** [_libinstall]

2023-03-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
nting the update. > > Any suggestions how to make updating work again? > > Kind regards, > > oh > > > -- > O. Hartmann > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: FreeBSD 13.2-stable crash in /usr/src/sys/amd64/include/pcpu_aux.h:55

2023-02-19 Thread Mateusz Guzik
e found here. > > http://mail.mikej.com/core.txt.0 > > It has not happened again, but I'm putting it though it's normal paces. > > The only thing that was occurring which is not a normal thing for me to > is I was moving TB's worth of data between directly attached two zpools. > > Regards, > > Michael Jung > > > > > -- Mateusz Guzik

buildkernel avoidably building modules specified in the config

2023-02-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
, but I guess sys/modules/Makefile will have to be patched to support it, which it only does for some modules at the moment. I don't have any interest in working on it, so just bringing this up for interested. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: 1 year src-patch anniversary!

2023-01-29 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 1/29/23, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 1/29/23, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote: >> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=261657 is a trivial fix >> to an admittedly trivial issue, but it's soon going to hit one year old, >> and has not had any feedback. Not even &q

Re: 1 year src-patch anniversary!

2023-01-29 Thread Mateusz Guzik
help have fallen on deaf ears. > Well I was not aware of it. mail me with git format-patch result and I'll commit. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: A panic a day

2022-09-22 Thread Mateusz Guzik
lock == _lock) { >> +ast_sched_locked(pcpu->pc_curthread, TDA_SCHED); >> +ipi_cpu(cpuid, IPI_AST); >> +} >> } >> #endif /* SMP */ >> >> @@ -1397,7 +1398,7 @@ sched_add(struct thread *td, int flags) >> >> cpuid = PCPU_GET(cpuid); >> if (single_cpu && cpu != cpuid) { >> -kick_other_cpu(td->td_priority, cpu); >> +kick_other_cpu(td->td_priority, cpu); >> } else { >> if (!single_cpu) { >> tidlemsk = idle_cpus_mask; > > -- > Steve > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: panic after update from main-n258027-c9baa974717a to main-n258075-5b5b7e2ca2fa

2022-09-17 Thread Mateusz Guzik
might be worth mentioning. > > Peace, > david > -- > David H. Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org > "In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the > protection of classified information. No one will be above the law." > -- D. Trump, August, 2016 > > See https://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: build of vfs_lookup.c now broken in non-INVARIANTS kernels

2022-09-17 Thread Mateusz Guzik
f is only defined when NONINVARIANTS is also defined. > > This breaks buildkernel. > > -- > Gary Jennejohn > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: kernel-side thread stack swapping

2022-09-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 9/2/22, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 04:11:40PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 9/2/22, Konstantin Belousov wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 02:05:37PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >> Is this really of practical use today? >&g

Re: kernel-side thread stack swapping

2022-09-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 9/2/22, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 02:05:37PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> Is this really of practical use today? >> >> I have a WIP patch which needs to temporarily store something on the >> stack and should things go wrong enough

kernel-side thread stack swapping

2022-09-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
it around, but perhaps the entire machinery can be just whacked? -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Lots of port failures today?

2022-08-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
failure. Nearly 12,000 > ports skipped: > > http://ci-08.md.hardenedbsd.org/build.html?mastername=hardenedbsd-current_amd64-local=2022-08-17_20h01m01s > > Thanks, > > -- > Shawn Webb > Cofounder / Security Engineer > HardenedBSD > > https://git.hardenedbsd.org/hardenedbsd/pubkeys/-/raw/master/Shawn_Webb/03A4CBEBB82EA5A67D9F3853FF2E67A277F8E1FA.pub.asc > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Lots of port failures today?

2022-08-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
ye just get stock top of the tree On 8/18/22, Larry Rosenman wrote: > On 08/18/2022 4:25 pm, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 8/18/22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>> On 8/18/22, Larry Rosenman wrote: >>>> https://home.lerctr.org:/build.html?mastername=live-h

Re: Lots of port failures today?

2022-08-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/18/22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 8/18/22, Larry Rosenman wrote: >> https://home.lerctr.org:/build.html?mastername=live-host_ports=2022-08-18_13h12m51s >> >> circa 97ecdc00ac5 on main >> Ideas? >> > > try with 9ac6eda6c6a36db6bffa01be7faea

Re: Lots of port failures today?

2022-08-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 8/18/22, Larry Rosenman wrote: > https://home.lerctr.org:/build.html?mastername=live-host_ports=2022-08-18_13h12m51s > > circa 97ecdc00ac5 on main > Ideas? > try with 9ac6eda6c6a36db6bffa01be7faea24f8bb92a0f reverted -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Can't build with INVARIANTS but not WITNESS

2022-04-27 Thread Mateusz Guzik
point is to not end up with actually unused variables even when is enabled. I patched it up in https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=b40c0db6f6d61ed594118d81dc691b9263a7e4d7 . This still allows for actually vars when only one of INVARIANTS or WITNESS is defined, but that's a much smaller problem than allowing it in general. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: nullfs and ZFS issues

2022-04-21 Thread Mateusz Guzik
not disabling the cache in nullfs? I would > expect zfs (or ufs) to cache the (meta)data anyway. > does the poor performance show up with https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/vnlru_free_pick.diff ? if the long runs are still there, can you get some profiling from it? sysctl -a before and after would be a start. My guess is that you are the vnode limit and bumping into the 1 second sleep. -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: nullfs and ZFS issues

2022-04-20 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/19/22, Doug Ambrisko wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:47:22AM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > | Try this: https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/vnlru_free_pick.diff > | > | this is not committable but should validate whether it works fine > > As a POC it's working. I s

Re: nullfs and ZFS issues

2022-04-19 Thread Mateusz Guzik
Try this: https://people.freebsd.org/~mjg/vnlru_free_pick.diff this is not committable but should validate whether it works fine On 4/19/22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 4/19/22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 4/19/22, Doug Ambrisko wrote: >>> I've switched my laptop to

Re: nullfs and ZFS issues

2022-04-19 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/19/22, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 4/19/22, Doug Ambrisko wrote: >> I've switched my laptop to use nullfs and ZFS. Previously, I used >> localhost NFS mounts instead of nullfs when nullfs would complain >> that it couldn't mount. Since that check has been removed, I've

Re: nullfs and ZFS issues

2022-04-19 Thread Mateusz Guzik
count 13846 lazy 0) > > Now I can easily see how the vnodes are used without going into ddb. > On my laptop I have various vnet jails and nullfs mount my homedir into > them so pretty much everything goes through nullfs to ZFS. I'm limping > along with the nullfs nocache and small number of vnodes but it would be > nice to not need that. > > Thanks, > > Doug A. > > -- Mateusz Guzik

"set but not used" warnings in the kernel

2022-03-29 Thread Mateusz Guzik
anyone else. Comments? -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: ktrace on NFSroot failing?

2022-03-10 Thread Mateusz Guzik
e? > I just did a quick check and it definitely fails on nfs mounts: # ktrace pwd /root/mjg # kdump -559038242 Events dropped. kdump: bogus length 0xdeadc0de I don't have time to look into it this week though. > -- > Bjoern A. Zeeb r15:7 > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: bastille : poudriere not working in jail: jail: jail:_set: Operation not permitted!

2022-02-28 Thread Mateusz Guzik
: Operation not permitted > + exit_handler > [...] > > Searching the net revealed some issues with setting IP4 and IP6 in > poudriere, but those > findings are dated back to 2017 and 2014 and I guess this is solved right > now. > > The difference between our manually jail.conf driven setup and the > XigmaNAS/bastille > based one is, bastille uses jib/netgraph based seutups of the vnet and the > ip4/ip6 is > setup from rc.conf, while we use epair in the other world and the ip is > setup from > withing the jail definition in jail.conf. > > I'm out of ideas here and after two days of trial and error and trying to > understand > what's going on lost ... Any hints or tipps? > > Thanks in advance, > > O. Hartmann > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

2021-12-11 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 12/11/21, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 12/11/21, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 12/11/21, Piper H wrote: >>> I read this article from Reddit: >>> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article=bsd-linux-eo2021=1 >>> >>> I am surprised to see that the BSD

Re: Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

2021-12-11 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 12/11/21, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 12/11/21, Piper H wrote: >> I read this article from Reddit: >> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article=bsd-linux-eo2021=1 >> >> I am surprised to see that the BSD cluster today has much worse >> performance &g

Re: Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 vs. DragonFlyBSD 6 vs. Linux

2021-12-11 Thread Mateusz Guzik
e of 37.602 seconds] Linux: 60.1 MB/s ,2030.6 MB/s [total time real time of 39.070 seconds] I don't know what these numbers are supposed to be, but it is pretty clear Phoronix grabs the first one. I'll look into sorting this out some time later. TL;DR don't drink and benchmark -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Kernel panic by executing `poudriere bulk`

2021-11-26 Thread Mateusz Guzik
me.org/FreeBSD/FreeBSD-14-CURRENT-amd64-main-n251115-ae92ace05fd.panic.png > Should be fixed by https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit?id=1879021942f56c8b264f4aeb1966b3733908ef62 -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: drm-devel-kmod build failures

2021-10-11 Thread Mateusz Guzik
s/graphics/drm-devel-kmod/work/drm-kmod-drm_v5.5.19_4/linuxkpi > > I get a similar error with drm-current-kmod. What changed? > > imb > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: witness_lock_list_get: witness exhausted

2021-10-04 Thread Mateusz Guzik
Just take it and change as you see fit, I don't have time to work on it. On 10/4/21, Alan Somers wrote: > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:31 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:41 AM, Michael Jung wrote: >> >> > On 2018-01-08 13:39, John Baldwi

Re: kernel panic while copying files

2021-06-08 Thread Mateusz Guzik
c:5664 > #13 0xffff808d9de7 in item_dtor (zone=0xfe00dcbdd800, > item=0xf800356b9000, size=544, udata=0x0, skip=SKIP_NONE) > at /usr/src/sys/vm/uma_core.c:3418 > #14 uma_zfree_arg (zone=0xfe00dcbdd800, item=0xf800356b9000, > udata=udata@entry=0x0) at /usr/src/sys/vm/uma_core.c:4374 > #15 0x802da503 in uma_zfree (zone=0x80d635c8 , > item=0x200) at /usr/src/sys/vm/uma.h:404 > #16 0x802d9117 in camperiphdone (periph=0xf800061e2c00, > done_ccb=0xf800355d6cc0) at /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_periph.c:1427 > #17 0x802dfebd in xpt_done_process (ccb_h=0xf800355d6cc0) > at /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_xpt.c:5491 > #18 0x802e1ec5 in xpt_done_td ( > arg=arg@entry=0x80d33d80 ) > at /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_xpt.c:5546 > #19 0x805dad80 in fork_exit (callout=0x802e1dd0 > , > arg=0x80d33d80 , frame=0xfe00c5f39c00) > at /usr/src/sys/kern/kern_fork.c:1083 > #20 > > Apparently caused by recent changes to CAM. > > Let me know if you want more information. > > -- > Gary Jennejohn > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: Panics in recent NFS server

2021-05-31 Thread Mateusz Guzik
)outlen; + *outlenp = (size_t)outlen + 1; if (hashp != NULL) *hashp = hash; nfsmout: On 5/31/21, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 5/31/21, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> It's probably my commit d81aefa8b7dd8cbeffeda541fca9962802404983 , >> I'll look at this later.

Re: Panics in recent NFS server

2021-05-31 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 5/31/21, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > It's probably my commit d81aefa8b7dd8cbeffeda541fca9962802404983 , > I'll look at this later. Well let me rephrase. While the panic was added in said commit, I suspect the bug is on nfs side -- it has its own namei variant which I suspect is managing ni_p

Re: Panics in recent NFS server

2021-05-31 Thread Mateusz Guzik
dim/sys/nfs/nfs_nfssvc.c:111 > #25 0x810d891e in syscallenter (td=) > at > /share/dim/src/freebsd/src-dim/sys/amd64/amd64/../../kern/subr_syscall.c:189 > #26 amd64_syscall (td=0xfe00bbfa3000, traced=0) > at /share/dim/src/freebsd/src-dim/sys/amd64/amd64/trap.c:1156 > #27 > #28 0x0008011aa59a in ?? () > > Is anybody seeing this too? :) > > I can probably bisect, but it'll take quite a while. > > -Dimitry > > -- Mateusz Guzik

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Strange behavior after running under high load

2021-04-04 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 4/3/21, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > Mateusz Guzik writes: > >> It is high because of this: >> msleep(_sig, _list_mtx, PVFS, "vlruwk", >> hz); >> >> i.e. it literally sleeps for 1 second. > > Before the line look

Re: [SOLVED] Re: Strange behavior after running under high load

2021-04-02 Thread Mateusz Guzik
more time to see whether this state persists or >> whether the system recovers from it. >> >> Any ideas what might cause such a system state??? > > Seems that Mateusz Guzik was right to mention performance issues when > the system is very low on vn

Re: Strange behavior after running under high load

2021-03-28 Thread Mateusz Guzik
uot;uptime" with truss and found, > that the loading of shared libraries proceeded at about one or two per > second until all were attached and then the program quickly printed the > expected results. > > I could probably recreate the issue by runn

Re: 13.0-RC2 / 14-CURRENT: Processes getting stuck in vlruwk state

2021-03-18 Thread Mateusz Guzik
> waiting a long time or even forever to allocate new vnodes. > > I can provide more information, I just need to know what. > > > Regards, > Yamagi > > -- > Homepage: https://www.yamagi.org > Github: https://github.com/yamagi > GPG: 0x1D502515 > --

Re: 13.0-RC2 / 14-CURRENT: Processes getting stuck in vlruwk state

2021-03-17 Thread Mateusz Guzik
: > Hi Mateusz, > the sysctl output after about 10 minutes into the problem is attached. > In case that its stripped by Mailman a copy can be found here: > https://deponie.yamagi.org/temp/sysctl_vlruwk.txt.xz > > Regards, > Yamagi > > On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:57:59 +0100 >

Re: 13.0-RC2 / 14-CURRENT: Processes getting stuck in vlruwk state

2021-03-17 Thread Mateusz Guzik
long time or even forever to allocate new vnodes. > > I can provide more information, I just need to know what. > > > Regards, > Yamagi > > -- > Homepage: https://www.yamagi.org > Github: https://github.com/yamagi > GPG: 0x1D502515 > -- Mateusz Guzik _

Re: -CURRENT panics in NFS

2021-02-27 Thread Mateusz Guzik
Thanks. I adjusted the namecache. However, the nfs fix provided by Rick should go in regardless. On 2/27/21, Juraj Lutter wrote: > > >> On 27 Feb 2021, at 21:49, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> >> Can you dump 'struct componentname *cnp'? This should do the trick: >> f 12

Re: -CURRENT panics in NFS

2021-02-27 Thread Mateusz Guzik
uraj Lutter wrote: > I am now running a patched kernel, without problems. > > I can boot to unpatched one and see the output of these ddb commands. > > otis > > — > Juraj Lutter > XMPP: juraj (at) lutter.sk > GSM: +421907986576 > >> On 27 Feb 2021, at 21:49, Mateusz

Re: -CURRENT panics in NFS

2021-02-27 Thread Mateusz Guzik
juraj (at) lutter.sk > GSM: +421907986576 > >> On 27 Feb 2021, at 16:53, Rick Macklem wrote: >> >> I reproduced the problem and the attached trivial patch >> seems to fix it. Please test the patch if you can. >> > > -- Mateusz Guzik _

Re: panic: condition seqc_in_modify(_vp->v_seqc) not met at zfs_acl.c:1147 (zfs_acl_chown_setattr)

2021-02-16 Thread Mateusz Guzik
err = zfs_acl_chown_setattr(attrzp); >> ASSERT(err == 0); >> } >> >> I am not sure if the assertion is actually applicable to attrzp (extended >> attributes "directory"). >> At least I do not see any seq c

Re: jails: /pool/jails/fulljailmake -> /pool/jails/fulljailbmake: No such file or directory

2021-02-15 Thread Mateusz Guzik
reebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > -- Mateusz Guzik ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: Problem compiling git from ports

2021-01-01 Thread Mateusz Guzik
[root@STING /usr/ports/devel/git]# > > ___ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" >

Re: panic: general protection fault from uipc_sockaddr+0x4c

2020-12-08 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 12/8/20, Mark Johnston wrote: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 04:40:16PM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> I think this is a long standing bug against exiting processes. >> >> filedesc_out only increments *hold* count, but that does not prevent >> fdescfree_fds from progres

Re: panic: general protection fault from uipc_sockaddr+0x4c

2020-12-08 Thread Mateusz Guzik
the fdtable shared lock thoughout all of > this, which is supposed to prevent the table entry from being freed > since that requires the exclusive lock. > > Could you show fdp->fd_ofiles[3] and fdp->fd_map[0] from frame 26? > ___ > f

Re: page fault due to close(2), possibly drm and i915kms related

2020-12-03 Thread Mateusz Guzik
drm.ko...Reading symbols from > /usr/lib/debug//boot/kernel/drm.ko.debug...done. > done. > Loaded symbols for /boot/kernel/drm.ko > Reading symbols from /boot/kernel/linuxkpi_gplv2.ko...Reading symbols from > /usr/lib/debug//boot/kernel/linuxkpi_gplv2.ko.debug...done. > done. > Lo

Re: Laptop exhibits erratic responsiveness

2020-11-30 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 11/30/20, David Wolfskill wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 03:20:15PM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 11/29/20, David Wolfskill wrote: >> > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 10:47:57AM -0500, Jonathan Looney wrote: >> >> FWIW, I would try running lockst

Re: Laptop exhibits erratic responsiveness

2020-11-29 Thread Mateusz Guzik
o lockstat output. :-/ > > > Finally, as another "control," I ran similar commands from freebeast, > while it was running head@r368119 (and building head@r368143). Those > results are in the "lockstat_freebeast" file. > According to the data you got the ent

Re: panic: VERIFY(ZFS_TEARDOWN_READ_HELD(zfsvfs)) failed

2020-11-07 Thread Mateusz Guzik
Fixed as of r367454 (also see r367453). On 11/6/20, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > I think I have an idea how to keep this. In the meantime you can just > comment it out. > > On 11/6/20, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> On 11/6/20, Andriy Gapon wrote: >>> On 06/11/2020 22:58, Mat

Re: panic: VERIFY(ZFS_TEARDOWN_READ_HELD(zfsvfs)) failed

2020-11-06 Thread Mateusz Guzik
I think I have an idea how to keep this. In the meantime you can just comment it out. On 11/6/20, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > On 11/6/20, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> On 06/11/2020 22:58, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >>> Note the underlying primitive was recently replaced. >>> >&

Re: panic: VERIFY(ZFS_TEARDOWN_READ_HELD(zfsvfs)) failed

2020-11-06 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On 11/6/20, Andriy Gapon wrote: > On 06/11/2020 22:58, Mateusz Guzik wrote: >> Note the underlying primitive was recently replaced. >> >> One immediate thing to check would be exact state of the lock. >> READ_HELD checks for reading only, fails if you have

  1   2   3   >