- Jeff Roberson's Original Message -
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > Does this mean that if, as a temporary measure, I disable
> > machdep.cpu_idle_hlt, ULE should work for me?
> >
> Yes, but it needs to be disabled before booting so you'll have to adjust
> it in the code
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> Jeff Roberson writes:
> > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On 27-Jun-2003 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jeff Roberson writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you call kseq_print(0) and kseq_print(1) from ddb?
> > >
On 28-Jun-2003 Jeff Roberson wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>>
>> On 27-Jun-2003 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>> >
>> > Jeff Roberson writes:
>> > >
>> > > Can you call kseq_print(0) and kseq_print(1) from ddb?
>> > >
>> >
>> > I found a different problem which is nearly as inte
Jeff Roberson writes:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> >
> > On 27-Jun-2003 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> > >
> > > Jeff Roberson writes:
> > > >
> > > > Can you call kseq_print(0) and kseq_print(1) from ddb?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I found a different problem which is nearly a
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 27-Jun-2003 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> >
> > Jeff Roberson writes:
> > >
> > > Can you call kseq_print(0) and kseq_print(1) from ddb?
> > >
> >
> > I found a different problem which is nearly as interesting.
> > Note that ps thinks sysctl is on cpu
On 27-Jun-2003 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> Jeff Roberson writes:
> >
> > Can you call kseq_print(0) and kseq_print(1) from ddb?
> >
>
> I found a different problem which is nearly as interesting.
> Note that ps thinks sysctl is on cpu 255...
#define NOCPU 0xff/* For when we ar
Jeff Roberson writes:
>
> Can you call kseq_print(0) and kseq_print(1) from ddb?
>
I found a different problem which is nearly as interesting.
Note that ps thinks sysctl is on cpu 255...
Boot hangs here:
cd0: Attempt to query device size failed: NOT READY, Medium not
present
SMP: AP CPU
Jeff Roberson writes:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> >
> > Jeff,
> >
> > On an "SMP" box I have, which is really a p4 box with one physical
> > CPU, and 2 HTT cores, I've seen some strange behaviour with ULE.
> > With ULE enabled, I've see jobs "wedge" for no apparent
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> Jeff,
>
> On an "SMP" box I have, which is really a p4 box with one physical
> CPU, and 2 HTT cores, I've seen some strange behaviour with ULE.
> With ULE enabled, I've see jobs "wedge" for no apparent reason.
> Some examples are fsck, dhclient and
Jeff,
On an "SMP" box I have, which is really a p4 box with one physical
CPU, and 2 HTT cores, I've seen some strange behaviour with ULE.
With ULE enabled, I've see jobs "wedge" for no apparent reason.
Some examples are fsck, dhclient and gcc.
Here's an example of fsck after it stopped respondi
10 matches
Mail list logo