Re: what's changed with newsyslog?

2017-12-18 Thread Baptiste Daroussin 
On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 04:41:29PM -0500, Michael Butler wrote:
> On 12/17/17 16:38, Ben Woods wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 at 3:47 am, Michael Butler
> > mailto:i...@protected-networks.net>> wrote:
> > 
> > In the past week or so I've been getting warnings like this ..
> > 
> > bzip2: Can't open input file /var/log/snmpd.log.0: No such file or
> > directory.
> > newsyslog: `/usr/bin/bzip2 -f /var/log/snmpd.log.0
> > /var/log/fwlw_clean_log.0' terminated with a non-zero status (1)
> 
>  [ .. snip .. ]
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Hints?
> > 
> >         imb
> > 
> > Could this be related to bapt’s recent change 11 days ago to allow
> > newsyslog to use different style of compression commands?
> > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=326617
> 
> Yes - I reverted to r326616 and the issue no longer appears,
> 
>   imb
> 

Should be fixed in r326930, sorry about that

Best regards,
Bapt


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: what's changed with newsyslog?

2017-12-17 Thread Michael Butler 
On 12/17/17 16:38, Ben Woods wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 at 3:47 am, Michael Butler
> mailto:i...@protected-networks.net>> wrote:
> 
> In the past week or so I've been getting warnings like this ..
> 
> bzip2: Can't open input file /var/log/snmpd.log.0: No such file or
> directory.
> newsyslog: `/usr/bin/bzip2 -f /var/log/snmpd.log.0
> /var/log/fwlw_clean_log.0' terminated with a non-zero status (1)

 [ .. snip .. ]

> 
> 
> Hints?
> 
>         imb
> 
> Could this be related to bapt’s recent change 11 days ago to allow
> newsyslog to use different style of compression commands?
> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=326617

Yes - I reverted to r326616 and the issue no longer appears,

imb

___
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: what's changed with newsyslog?

2017-12-17 Thread Ben Woods 
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 at 3:47 am, Michael Butler 
wrote:

> In the past week or so I've been getting warnings like this ..
>
> bzip2: Can't open input file /var/log/snmpd.log.0: No such file or
> directory.
> newsyslog: `/usr/bin/bzip2 -f /var/log/snmpd.log.0
> /var/log/fwlw_clean_log.0' terminated with a non-zero status (1)
>
> I've checked the relevant /etc/newsyslog.conf and its /usr/local/etc
> counterpart to ensure there are tabs in the right places but the errors
> persist.
>
> Similarly, the relevant files are there and seem to be rotated as
> expected/desired ..
>
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel 77 Dec 17 09:00 fwlw_clean_log
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  11282 Dec 17 09:00 fwlw_clean_log.0.bz2
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel   9452 Dec 17 05:00 fwlw_clean_log.1.bz2
>
>  [ .. ]
>
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  50992 Dec 17 09:45 snmpd.log
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel   1834 Dec 17 09:00 snmpd.log.0.bz2
> -rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel   1846 Dec 17 07:00 snmpd.log.1.bz2
>
>
> Hints?
>
> imb
> ___
> 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"


Could this be related to bapt’s recent change 11 days ago to allow
newsyslog to use different style of compression commands?
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=326617

Regards,
Ben
-- 

--
From: Benjamin Woods
woods...@gmail.com
___
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"

what's changed with newsyslog?

2017-12-17 Thread Michael Butler 
In the past week or so I've been getting warnings like this ..

bzip2: Can't open input file /var/log/snmpd.log.0: No such file or
directory.
newsyslog: `/usr/bin/bzip2 -f /var/log/snmpd.log.0
/var/log/fwlw_clean_log.0' terminated with a non-zero status (1)

I've checked the relevant /etc/newsyslog.conf and its /usr/local/etc
counterpart to ensure there are tabs in the right places but the errors
persist.

Similarly, the relevant files are there and seem to be rotated as
expected/desired ..

-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel 77 Dec 17 09:00 fwlw_clean_log
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  11282 Dec 17 09:00 fwlw_clean_log.0.bz2
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel   9452 Dec 17 05:00 fwlw_clean_log.1.bz2

 [ .. ]

-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel  50992 Dec 17 09:45 snmpd.log
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel   1834 Dec 17 09:00 snmpd.log.0.bz2
-rw-r--r--  1 root  wheel   1846 Dec 17 07:00 snmpd.log.1.bz2


Hints?

imb
___
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: What's changed relating to localhost then?

2003-11-22 Thread Don Bowman 
From: Christian Laursen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Steve Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > If you telnet to 127.0.0.1 the system still believes you are
> > coming from your public IP. Bizarre that. Other IPs don't act
> > that way. My system has two public IPs and 127.0.0.1. If I
> > telnet to myself on either of the public IPs then I appear
> > from the correct IP. However 127.0.0.1 no longer seems to 
> > work that way and that does break a number of things that
> > expect to be connected to by 127.0.0.1
> 
> I can confirm this behaviour. It is possible to force the local
> address to 127.0.0.1 though.
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ telnet 127.0.0.1 25  
>   [19:39]
> Trying 127.0.0.1...
> Connected to localhost.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 borg.borderworlds.dk ESMTP Postfix
> 
> Nov 22 19:39:44 borg postfix/smtpd[2683]: connect from 
> borg.borderworlds.dk[10.1.0.2]
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ telnet -s 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 25 
>   [19:40]
> Trying 127.0.0.1...
> Connected to localhost.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 borg.borderworlds.dk ESMTP Postfix
> 
> Nov 22 19:40:06 borg postfix/smtpd[2683]: connect from 
> localhost[127.0.0.1]
> 
> Fortunately this behaviour didn't break anything here, but it 
> does seem
> broken nonetheless.

This seems to break amd:

amd[751]: Map support for: root, passwd, hesiod, union, nis, ndbm, file,
error.
amd[751]: AMFS: nfs, link, nfsx, nfsl, host, linkx, program, union, inherit,
ufs,
amd[751]:   cdfs, pcfs, auto, direct, toplvl, error.   
amd[751]: FS: cd9660, nfs, nfs3, msdosfs, ufs, unionfs.
amd[751]: Network 1: wire="10.128.2.0" (netnumber=10.128.2).

amd[751]: Network 2: wire="192.168.3.0" (netnumber=192.168.3).

amd[751]: My ip addr is 127.0.0.1  
amd[752]: released controlling tty using setsid()
amd[752]: file server localhost, type local, state starts up
amd[753]: /phaedrus: disabling nfs congestion window   
amd[752]: ignoring request from 10.128.2.57:1018, expected 127.0.0.1

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: What's changed relating to localhost then?

2003-11-22 Thread Christian Laursen 
Steve Ames <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> If you telnet to 127.0.0.1 the system still believes you are
> coming from your public IP. Bizarre that. Other IPs don't act
> that way. My system has two public IPs and 127.0.0.1. If I
> telnet to myself on either of the public IPs then I appear
> from the correct IP. However 127.0.0.1 no longer seems to 
> work that way and that does break a number of things that
> expect to be connected to by 127.0.0.1

I can confirm this behaviour. It is possible to force the local
address to 127.0.0.1 though.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ telnet 127.0.0.1 25
[19:39]
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 borg.borderworlds.dk ESMTP Postfix

Nov 22 19:39:44 borg postfix/smtpd[2683]: connect from borg.borderworlds.dk[10.1.0.2]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ telnet -s 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 25   
[19:40]
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 borg.borderworlds.dk ESMTP Postfix

Nov 22 19:40:06 borg postfix/smtpd[2683]: connect from localhost[127.0.0.1]

Fortunately this behaviour didn't break anything here, but it does seem
broken nonetheless.

I updated my machine earlier today and got 5.2-BETA:

FreeBSD borg.borderworlds.dk 5.2-BETA FreeBSD 5.2-BETA #3: Sat Nov 22 13:25:47 CET 
2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BORG  i386

-- 
Best regards
Christian Laursen
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: What's changed relating to localhost then?

2003-11-22 Thread Uwe Laverenz 
Matt Smith wrote:

I've just updated to 5.2-BETA today and have noticed that my spamd is 
now rejecting all connections from spamc because they are not coming 
from 127.0.0.1 any more. It's now using my public IP address of 82.x.x.x:
Yes, same problem here: at first, amavis refused to accept mails from 
postfix and when I started to try to fix it (without having enough black 
coffee inside) I got postfix to bounce all undelivered mail (~100-200 
mails lost). :-/

I got amavis+postfix working again, but they still don't use the 
loopback interface. It would be nice if someone could help me to 
understand the reason for this. :)

thanks,
Uwe
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: What's changed relating to localhost then?

2003-11-22 Thread Steve Ames 

I noticed the same thing yesterday when postgresql stopped working
properly because there wasn't an entry for my public IP in the
pg_hba.conf file.

If you telnet to 127.0.0.1 the system still believes you are
coming from your public IP. Bizarre that. Other IPs don't act
that way. My system has two public IPs and 127.0.0.1. If I
telnet to myself on either of the public IPs then I appear
from the correct IP. However 127.0.0.1 no longer seems to 
work that way and that does break a number of things that
expect to be connected to by 127.0.0.1

-Steve

On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 02:46:54PM +, Matt Smith wrote:
> I've just updated to 5.2-BETA today and have noticed that my spamd is 
> now rejecting all connections from spamc because they are not coming 
> from 127.0.0.1 any more. It's now using my public IP address of 82.x.x.x:
> 
> Nov 22 14:38:30 womble spamd[657]: unauthorized connection from 
> 82-32-25-111.cable.ubr04.azte.blueyonder.co.uk [82.32.25.111] at port 49167
> 
> I noticed somebody reported a similar thing earlier.
> 
> I'm actually in the process of reverting to a -current of 
> 2003.11.14.00.00.00 because my xl0 ethernet card is acting up as 
> mentioned in another thread so I want to see if it works with that 
> kernel. (Can't go further back due to statfs).
> 
> Also one of my machines running 5.2-BETA just hung dead within 5 minutes 
> of booting. I don't have DDB etc configured though so can't tell why.
> 
> Matt.
> 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: What's changed relating to localhost then?

2003-11-22 Thread Anthony Ginepro 
> I've just updated to 5.2-BETA today and have noticed that my spamd is 
> now rejecting all connections from spamc because they are not coming 
> from 127.0.0.1 any more. It's now using my public IP address of 82.x.x.x:
> 
> Nov 22 14:38:30 womble spamd[657]: unauthorized connection from 
> 82-32-25-111.cable.ubr04.azte.blueyonder.co.uk [82.32.25.111] at port 49167
> 
> I noticed somebody reported a similar thing earlier.

It was me, I'm glad not to be dumb. I note also that metacity takes ages to
start. I'm waiting a new change to network code in order to compile another -CURRENT.

> I'm actually in the process of reverting to a -current of 
> 2003.11.14.00.00.00 because my xl0 ethernet card is acting up as 
> mentioned in another thread so I want to see if it works with that 
> kernel. (Can't go further back due to statfs).
> 
> Also one of my machines running 5.2-BETA just hung dead within 5 minutes 
> of booting. I don't have DDB etc configured though so can't tell why.
> 
> Matt.
> 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

What's changed relating to localhost then?

2003-11-22 Thread Matt Smith 
I've just updated to 5.2-BETA today and have noticed that my spamd is 
now rejecting all connections from spamc because they are not coming 
from 127.0.0.1 any more. It's now using my public IP address of 82.x.x.x:

Nov 22 14:38:30 womble spamd[657]: unauthorized connection from 
82-32-25-111.cable.ubr04.azte.blueyonder.co.uk [82.32.25.111] at port 49167

I noticed somebody reported a similar thing earlier.

I'm actually in the process of reverting to a -current of 
2003.11.14.00.00.00 because my xl0 ethernet card is acting up as 
mentioned in another thread so I want to see if it works with that 
kernel. (Can't go further back due to statfs).

Also one of my machines running 5.2-BETA just hung dead within 5 minutes 
of booting. I don't have DDB etc configured though so can't tell why.

Matt.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-09 Thread Julian Elischer 

Andrew Gallatin wrote:
> 
> Andrew Gallatin writes:
>  >
>  > Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes:
>  >  > Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>  >  > > I believe that vmware mmaps a region of memory and then somehow syncs
>  >  > > it to disk. (It is certainly doing something like it here).
>  >  >
>  >  > Theory: VMWare mmaps a region of memory corresponding to the virtual
>  >  > machine's "physical" RAM, then touches every page during startup.
>  >  > Unless some form of clustering is done, this causes 16384 write
>  >  > operations for a 64 MB virtual machine...
>  >  >
>  >
>  > Pretty much.  But the issue is that this should never hit the disk
>  > unless we're under memory pressure because it is mapped MAP_NOSYNC
>  > (actually the file is unlinked prior to the mmap() and a heuristic in
>  > vm_mmap() detects this and sets MAP_NOSYNC).
> 
> I take it back.  At least with the latest version of vmware, it is
> apparently not mapped MAP_NOSYNC.  I think they've moved from
> mmap'ing a file in $TMPDIR to just using the CONFIG.std save/resume
> file.  Perhaps this is only if you have resumed from a suspended
> state... I haven't checked that out yet.
> 
> At any rate, hacking linux_mmap to ad MAP_NOSYNC to mmaped files, in
> combination with yesterdays patch, appears to improve
> perf. considerably.

I don't like the sound of that hack..
are they doing something in Linux to tell Linux to not sync it?
I nkow it's gross but could we only do that hack if it'a vmware? 

(probably should be on -emulation)


> 
> Drew
> 
> --
> Andrew Gallatin, Sr Systems Programmer  http://www.cs.duke.edu/~gallatin
> Duke University Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Department of Computer Science  Phone: (919) 660-6590

-- 
  __--_|\  Julian Elischer
 /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
v


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-09 Thread Andrew Gallatin 


Andrew Gallatin writes:
 > 
 > Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes:
 >  > Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 >  > > I believe that vmware mmaps a region of memory and then somehow syncs 
 >  > > it to disk. (It is certainly doing something like it here).
 >  > 
 >  > Theory: VMWare mmaps a region of memory corresponding to the virtual
 >  > machine's "physical" RAM, then touches every page during startup.
 >  > Unless some form of clustering is done, this causes 16384 write
 >  > operations for a 64 MB virtual machine...
 >  > 
 > 
 > Pretty much.  But the issue is that this should never hit the disk
 > unless we're under memory pressure because it is mapped MAP_NOSYNC
 > (actually the file is unlinked prior to the mmap() and a heuristic in
 > vm_mmap() detects this and sets MAP_NOSYNC).

I take it back.  At least with the latest version of vmware, it is
apparently not mapped MAP_NOSYNC.  I think they've moved from
mmap'ing a file in $TMPDIR to just using the CONFIG.std save/resume
file.  Perhaps this is only if you have resumed from a suspended
state... I haven't checked that out yet.

At any rate, hacking linux_mmap to ad MAP_NOSYNC to mmaped files, in
combination with yesterdays patch, appears to improve
perf. considerably. 

Drew

--
Andrew Gallatin, Sr Systems Programmer  http://www.cs.duke.edu/~gallatin
Duke University Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Computer Science  Phone: (919) 660-6590



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Julian Elischer 

David Malone wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 02:47:59PM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > > what does systat -vmstat or vmstat 1
> > > show?
> > > Better still, I guess we could do a linux-truss
> > > and see what it's doing...
> >
> > I believe that it's strace under linux.  If someone can provide me
> > with a binary of this tool I'll happily run it here and see what
> > vmware's doing.
> 
> You could use FreeBSD ktrace and then the linux_kdump port.
> 
> David.

I believe truss can do linux binaries which is why I mantionned it.
(but I have never done it)

> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

-- 
  __--_|\  Julian Elischer
 /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
v


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Andrew Gallatin 


Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes:
 > Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
 > > I believe that vmware mmaps a region of memory and then somehow syncs 
 > > it to disk. (It is certainly doing something like it here).
 > 
 > Theory: VMWare mmaps a region of memory corresponding to the virtual
 > machine's "physical" RAM, then touches every page during startup.
 > Unless some form of clustering is done, this causes 16384 write
 > operations for a 64 MB virtual machine...
 > 

Pretty much.  But the issue is that this should never hit the disk
unless we're under memory pressure because it is mapped MAP_NOSYNC
(actually the file is unlinked prior to the mmap() and a heuristic in
vm_mmap() detects this and sets MAP_NOSYNC).

The real problem is that our MAP_NOSYNC doesn't fully work in at least
one major case.  As I understand it, the technique we use is to set
the MAP_ENTRY_NOSYNC in the map entry at mmap time. On a write fault,
PG_NOSYNC is set in the page's flags.  A lazy msync will skip
PG_NOSYNC pages.

The problem comes when a page is read from prior to being written
to.  The page gets mapped in read/write and we don't take a write
fault, so the PG_NOSYNC flag never gets set.  (This accounts for the
flurry of disk i/o shortly after vmware starts).  When the pages get
sunk to disk, the vnode is locked and the application will freeze in a
"vmpfw" 

The following patch sets PG_NOSYNC on faults other than write faults.
This seems to work for my test program, and for vmware (I've only very
briefly tested it).  Assuming that it is correct, the code around it
should be reorganized somewhat.   This is against -stable, as I don't
have any -current i386s..

Index: vm_fault.c
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/vm/vm_fault.c,v
retrieving revision 1.108.2.2
diff -u -r1.108.2.2 vm_fault.c
--- vm_fault.c  2000/08/04 22:31:11 1.108.2.2
+++ vm_fault.c  2001/02/08 23:04:02
@@ -804,6 +804,10 @@
}
vm_page_dirty(fs.m);
vm_pager_page_unswapped(fs.m);
+   } else {
+   if ((fs.entry->eflags & MAP_ENTRY_NOSYNC) && 
+   (fs.m->dirty == 0))
+   vm_page_flag_set(fs.m, PG_NOSYNC);
}
}
 


Cheers,

Drew

--
Andrew Gallatin, Sr Systems Programmer  http://www.cs.duke.edu/~gallatin
Duke University Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Computer Science  Phone: (919) 660-6590


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Brian Somers 

> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:58:17AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >=20
> > Looks like some way of clustering this might achieve a lot.
> >=20
> > what does systat -vmstat or vmstat 1
> > show?
> > Better still, I guess we could do a linux-truss
> > and see what it's doing...
> 
> I believe that it's strace under linux.  If someone can provide me
> with a binary of this tool I'll happily run it here and see what
> vmware's doing.
> 
> Joe

The problem seems to have gone away after this (kindly pointed out to 
me by Maxim after my other post about xsane dropping cores):

: Subject: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/stdio findfp.c
: Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:34:50 -0800 (PST)
: From: Maxim Sobolev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: 
: sobomax 2001/02/07 09:34:49 PST
: 
:   Modified files:
: lib/libc/stdio   findfp.c 
:   Log:
:   Fix a f^Hdamn typo, which prevented to fopen() more that 17 files at once.
:   
:   Tested by:  knu, sobomax and other #bsdcode'rs
:   
:   Revision  ChangesPath
:   1.9   +2 -2  src/lib/libc/stdio/findfp.c

-- 
Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
     
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread David Malone 

On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 02:47:59PM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > what does systat -vmstat or vmstat 1
> > show?
> > Better still, I guess we could do a linux-truss
> > and see what it's doing...
> 
> I believe that it's strace under linux.  If someone can provide me
> with a binary of this tool I'll happily run it here and see what
> vmware's doing.

You could use FreeBSD ktrace and then the linux_kdump port.

David.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:58:17AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> 
> Looks like some way of clustering this might achieve a lot.
> 
> what does systat -vmstat or vmstat 1
> show?
> Better still, I guess we could do a linux-truss
> and see what it's doing...

I believe that it's strace under linux.  If someone can provide me
with a binary of this tool I'll happily run it here and see what
vmware's doing.

Joe

 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav 

Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I believe that vmware mmaps a region of memory and then somehow syncs 
> it to disk. (It is certainly doing something like it here).

Theory: VMWare mmaps a region of memory corresponding to the virtual
machine's "physical" RAM, then touches every page during startup.
Unless some form of clustering is done, this causes 16384 write
operations for a 64 MB virtual machine...

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Julian Elischer 

Josef Karthauser wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:08:12AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > >
> > >   714 root -14   0   123M 79192K inode0:45 25.29% 25.29% vmware
> > >
> > > When this happens the whole machine freezes also.  Processes run, but
> > > new processes don't get forked.  The whole machine appears to be I/O
> > > bound.   (What's the 'inode' state?)
> > this sounds like a differnt starvation problem.
> > when it's happenning, what does 'iostat 1' show?
> > (how many transactions per second?)
> 
> It looks like below.

Looks like some way of clustering this might achieve a lot.

what does systat -vmstat or vmstat 1
show?
Better still, I guess we could do a linux-truss
and see what it's doing...


> Joe
> 
>   tty ad0  fd0 cpu
>  tin tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
>0  179  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
>0   59  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
>0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
>0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   2  0  0  2 97

-- 
  __--_|\  Julian Elischer
 /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
v


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 04:08:12AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > 
> >   714 root -14   0   123M 79192K inode0:45 25.29% 25.29% vmware
> > 
> > When this happens the whole machine freezes also.  Processes run, but
> > new processes don't get forked.  The whole machine appears to be I/O
> > bound.   (What's the 'inode' state?)
> this sounds like a differnt starvation problem.
> when it's happenning, what does 'iostat 1' show?
> (how many transactions per second?)

It looks like below.
Joe

  tty ad0  fd0 cpu
 tin tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
   0  179  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   59  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   2  0  0  2 97
   0   59  8.00  66  0.52   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  2  2 95
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  1  2 97
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  1  2 98
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  1  1 98
   0   59  8.00  66  0.52   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
  79   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  1  2 98
 183   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  3  2 95
 143   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  3  3 94
 197   59  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  1  2 97
  48   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   8   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  2  2 96
 228   59  8.00  66  0.52   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  2  2 96
  40   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  2  2 96
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  1  2 97
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  1  3 95
   0   59  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  1  2 97
  tty ad0  fd0 cpu
 tin tout  KB/t tps  MB/s   KB/t tps  MB/s  us ni sy in id
   0  179  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  2  2 97
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  1  2 96
   0   59  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  3 97
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   59  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   1  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  1  2 98
   0   59  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  2  2 95
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  1  3 96
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   2  0  1  2 95
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   59  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   59  8.00  66  0.52   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  66  0.52   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  67  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98
   0   60  8.00  68  0.53   0.00   0  0.00   0  0  0  2 98


 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Julian Elischer 

Josef Karthauser wrote:
> 
> The slowdown during start up appears to be in biowr; this is probably
> because of IDE write caching being switched off.  More seriously
> the vmware hangs during various phases of it's boot process.

Write caching is incompaible with soft updates.
The drive must NEVER report that something is on disk when it really is not!

> 
> i.e:
> 
>   714 root -14   0   123M 79192K inode0:45 25.29% 25.29% vmware
> 
> When this happens the whole machine freezes also.  Processes run, but
> new processes don't get forked.  The whole machine appears to be I/O
> bound.   (What's the 'inode' state?)
this sounds like a differnt starvation problem.
when it's happenning, what does 'iostat 1' show?
(how many transactions per second?)

I believe that vmware mmaps a region of memory and then somehow syncs 
it to disk. (It is certainly doing something like it here).


> 
> The problem is definitely solved by enabling ATA_ENABLE_WC in the kernel
> config.  What's unclear to me is why the hang in 'inode' with it
> switched off.  I understand that biowr's would take longer, which is
> vmware does as it brings up the virtual machine, but why the hanging
> and freezing in 'inode'?

maybe syncing mmapped regions locks out other types of activity?
Matt?


>
> +#else
> +if (ata_command(adp->controller, adp->unit, ATA_C_SETFEATURES,
> +   0, 0, 0, 0, ATA_C_F_DIS_WCACHE, ATA_WAIT_INTR))
> +   printf("ad%d: disabling write cache failed\n", adp->lun);
> +#endif
> 

we used to do this on the interjet because we ran soft updates.

-- 
  __--_|\  Julian Elischer
 /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
v


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-08 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 10:07:06PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
> 
> On 7 Feb 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> 
> > Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> > > for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> > > 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.
> > 
> > Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
> > narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?
> 
> I've experienced a substantial slowdown in VMware since bumping forwards
> from -STABLE on my workstation.  As I recently commented on -emulation,
> I've also been experiencing 30-40 second hangs of the system during VMware
> startup and occasional serious slowdown while running, which may be
> related to the fairly intensive VM activity for page wiring and the like,
> or possible poor interaction with the ATA driver.  I also get messages on
> the order of the following: 

The slowdown during start up appears to be in biowr; this is probably
because of IDE write caching being switched off.  More seriously
the vmware hangs during various phases of it's boot process.

i.e:

  714 root -14   0   123M 79192K inode0:45 25.29% 25.29% vmware

When this happens the whole machine freezes also.  Processes run, but
new processes don't get forked.  The whole machine appears to be I/O
bound.   (What's the 'inode' state?)

The problem is definitely solved by enabling ATA_ENABLE_WC in the kernel
config.  What's unclear to me is why the hang in 'inode' with it
switched off.  I understand that biowr's would take longer, which is
vmware does as it brings up the virtual machine, but why the hanging
and freezing in 'inode'?

Joe


RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/dev/ata/ata-disk.c,v
retrieving revision 1.91
retrieving revision 1.92
diff -u -r1.91 -r1.92
--- ata-disk.c  2001/01/19 13:53:54 1.91
+++ ata-disk.c  2001/01/29 18:00:35 1.92
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
  * (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF
  * THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
  *
- * $FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/ata/ata-disk.c,v 1.91 2001/01/19 13:53:54 peter Exp $
+ * $FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/ata/ata-disk.c,v 1.92 2001/01/29 18:00:35 sos Exp $
  */
 
 #include "opt_global.h"
@@ -133,10 +133,15 @@
0, 0, 0, 0, ATA_C_F_ENAB_RCACHE, ATA_WAIT_INTR))
printf("ad%d: enabling readahead cache failed\n", adp->lun);
 
+#if defined(ATA_ENABLE_WC) || defined(ATA_ENABLE_TAGS)
 if (ata_command(adp->controller, adp->unit, ATA_C_SETFEATURES,
0, 0, 0, 0, ATA_C_F_ENAB_WCACHE, ATA_WAIT_INTR))
printf("ad%d: enabling write cache failed\n", adp->lun);
-
+#else
+if (ata_command(adp->controller, adp->unit, ATA_C_SETFEATURES,
+   0, 0, 0, 0, ATA_C_F_DIS_WCACHE, ATA_WAIT_INTR))
+   printf("ad%d: disabling write cache failed\n", adp->lun);
+#endif
 /* use DMA if drive & controller supports it */
 ata_dmainit(adp->controller, adp->unit,
ata_pmode(AD_PARAM), ata_wmode(AD_PARAM), ata_umode(AD_PARAM));


 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-07 Thread Robert Watson 


On 7 Feb 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:

> Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> > for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> > 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.
> 
> Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
> narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?

I've experienced a substantial slowdown in VMware since bumping forwards
from -STABLE on my workstation.  As I recently commented on -emulation,
I've also been experiencing 30-40 second hangs of the system during VMware
startup and occasional serious slowdown while running, which may be
related to the fairly intensive VM activity for page wiring and the like,
or possible poor interaction with the ATA driver.  I also get messages on
the order of the following: 

swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: device: ad0s1b, blkno: 2696, size: 4096

And have heard that others have started getting them also, although don't
have confirmation of that.  It may be that things need retuning a bit in
-CURRENT, or that we need to wait for SMPng to do some pushdown of locks.

Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-07 Thread Bruce Evans 

On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:56:14PM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:26:15PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> > > > for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> > > > 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.
> > > 
> > > Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
> > > narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?
> > 
> > As I think about it it was definitity working before the symbol changes
> > in libc/libc_r changed.  Was that last week?  No probably the week
> > before.  It was working fine last week, but I'm not sure which day's I
> > updated the kernel.
> > 
> > I'll try some builds.
> 
> Ok.  The problem definitely began between -D2001-01-29 and -D2001-01-30.
> I'll try and binary chop to workout what caused it.

If you have ata disks, try "options ATA_ENABLE_WC".  Nothing else has
changed significantly in this period.  I don't know how this would effect
vmware boot speeds.

Bruce



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-07 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:56:14PM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:26:15PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> > > for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> > > 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.
> > 
> > Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
> > narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?
> 
> As I think about it it was definitity working before the symbol changes
> in libc/libc_r changed.  Was that last week?  No probably the week
> before.  It was working fine last week, but I'm not sure which day's I
> updated the kernel.
> 
> I'll try some builds.

Ok.  The problem definitely began between -D2001-01-29 and -D2001-01-30.
I'll try and binary chop to workout what caused it.

Joe

 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-07 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:26:15PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> > for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> > 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.
> 
> Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
> narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?

As I think about it it was definitity working before the symbol changes
in libc/libc_r changed.  Was that last week?  No probably the week
before.  It was working fine last week, but I'm not sure which day's I
updated the kernel.

I'll try some builds.
Joe

 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-07 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:26:15PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> > for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> > 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.
> 
> Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
> narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?

I'll compile up a couple of kernels and see if I can hone it down.

Joe

 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-07 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav 

Brian Somers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
> for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
> 366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.

Would it be possible for someone experiencing this slowdown to try to
narrow down the day (or even the week) on which it occurred?

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-06 Thread Brian Somers 

> Bruce Evans wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> > > the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
> > 
> > Use of cmpxchg and possibly other SMP pessimizations.
> > 
> > > A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
> > > of minutes;  on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to boot,
> > > and disk I/O is through the roof.
> > >
> > > Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)
> > 
> > Read your freebsd-emulation mail :-).
> 
> You are wrong Bruce, the cmpxchg discussion was regarding why
> running FreeBSD as a GUEST OS was slow, because the virtual machine was
> very slow at emulating them. That does not explain why Windows2000 and the Boot
> loader
> both slowed down by a factor or 3->6 over teh last 2 weeks.
> 
> It's even slower to start up, before it has even started any emulation..
> 
> This feels like the system is massively slowing down page activations or
> some other sort of exceptions that are standard for vmware.
> 
> The same vmware with the same guest OS (not been updated) is now much slower.

Indeed.  I've been doing a ``make build'' on an OpenBSD-current vm 
for three days (probably about 36 hours excluding suspends) on a 
366MHz laptop with a ATA33 disk.

This is on a Feb 4 kernel.  NetBSD next

> -- 
>   __--_|\  Julian Elischer
>  /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
> ---> X_.---._/  
> v

-- 
Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  <http://www.Awfulhak.org>   
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-06 Thread Julian Elischer 

Bruce Evans wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> 
> > I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> > the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
> 
> Use of cmpxchg and possibly other SMP pessimizations.
> 
> > A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
> > of minutes;  on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to boot,
> > and disk I/O is through the roof.
> >
> > Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)
> 
> Read your freebsd-emulation mail :-).

You are wrong Bruce, the cmpxchg discussion was regarding why
running FreeBSD as a GUEST OS was slow, because the virtual machine was
very slow at emulating them. That does not explain why Windows2000 and the Boot
loader
both slowed down by a factor or 3->6 over teh last 2 weeks.

It's even slower to start up, before it has even started any emulation..

This feels like the system is massively slowing down page activations or
some other sort of exceptions that are standard for vmware.

The same vmware with the same guest OS (not been updated) is now much slower.
  
> 
> Bruce
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

-- 
  __--_|\  Julian Elischer
 /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
v


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-06 Thread Julian Elischer 

Josef Karthauser wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
> 
> A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
> of minutes;  on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to boot,
> and disk I/O is through the roof.
> 
> Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)
> 
> Joe
> 
>   
>Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature

I noticed this too. It's about 3 x slower for me. Even the startup sequence
when we haven't even loaded the bootblocks is MUCH slower..
I'm using vmware 1.0.x and running FreeBSD on it for kernel debugging.


-- 
  __--_|\  Julian Elischer
 /   \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(   OZ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
v


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-06 Thread Josef Karthauser 

On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 02:40:27AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)
> 
> Read your freebsd-emulation mail :-).

/me wanders off to subscribe to freebsd-emulation.

Thanks Bruce.
Joe

 PGP signature

Re: What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-06 Thread Bruce Evans 

On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:

> I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.

Use of cmpxchg and possibly other SMP pessimizations.

> A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
> of minutes;  on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to boot,
> and disk I/O is through the roof.
> 
> Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)

Read your freebsd-emulation mail :-).

Bruce



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

What's changed recently with vmware/linuxemu/file I/O

2001-02-06 Thread Josef Karthauser 

Hi,

I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.

A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
of minutes;  on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to boot,
and disk I/O is through the roof.

Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)

Joe

 PGP signature

what's changed?

1999-11-16 Thread Marc Schneiders 

Make release was working fine a week ago. The past four days I get the
following error every time I try:

(cd /usr/src/etc/..;  install -c -o root -g wheel -m 444  COPYRIGHT
/reserve/)
(cd /usr/src/etc/../share/man; make makedb; )
makewhatis /reserve/usr/share/man
makewhatis /reserve/usr/share/perl/man
if [ -f /etc/resolv.conf ]; then  cp -p /etc/resolv.conf /reserve/etc;
fi
cd /usr/src/release/.. && make installworld DESTDIR=/reserve NOMAN=1
cd /usr/src;
PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/sbin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/sbin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/bin:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin
BISON_SIMPLE=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/share/misc/bison.simple
COMPILER_PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/libexec:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin
GCC_EXEC_PREFIX=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib/
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib
LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib:/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/lib
PERL5LIB=/reserve/usr/libdata/perl/5.00503
OBJFORMAT_PATH=/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/libexec  CFLAGS="-nostdinc -O
-pipe" /usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin/make -f Makefile.inc1 reinstall
objformat: not found
"/usr/src/Makefile.inc1", line 961: warning: "objformat" returned
non-zero status
echo:No such file or directory
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/src.
*** Error code 1

What do I do wrong? I've no special settings in the Makefile that can
cause this. I cvsupped and rebuilt (cvs -d co src) my own source tree
from scratch. Didn't help.  

TIA!

Marc Schneiders

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

propro   11:38pm  up   5 days,  11:24,  load average: 2.18 2.10 2.09



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message