Re: LSI 9211 driver
A driver called "mps" exists in FreeBSD 9-CURRENT. We're working to move it to FreeBSD 8 in time for the 8.2 release. Scott On Nov 15, 2010, at 10:03 AM, Gergely CZUCZY (by way of Gergely CZUCZY ) wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to ask when can we expect a driver for the LSI 9211 hardware? > That is, the following device: > non...@pci0:4:0:0: class=0x010700 card=0x30501000 chip=0x00721000 > rev=0x02 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'LSI Logic (Was: Symbios Logic, NCR)' >class = mass storage >subclass = SAS > > > I've tried to add the cardID to the mfi(4) and mpt(4) drivers, but the > most I could get, is a failed initalization. > > If any devs supposed to add properly the device to any of the drivers, > I should be able to arrange access to this device for the time of the > development. > > Please be so kind to reply to any known developers of these drivers, if > they might not read these mailing lists, in order to get a working > driver for this card (been seen google hits on many missing the support > for this driver). > > Drivers for linux and solars are availabe on LSI.com, but not for fbsd. > > Thank you very much in advance. > > Best regards, > Gergely > > -- > Sincerely, > Gergely CZUCZY > Harmless Digital Bt > > +36-30-9702963 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Any help about FreeBSD & Dell's Troubleshooting Tool DSET
The sense data in the screen shot boils down to an ASC/ASCQ pair of
0x35/0x05. Looking this up in the ASC table found at t10.org gives
the following:
35h/05h ENCLOSURE SERVICES CHECKSUM ERROR
What this basically means is that the disk enclosure that you're using
has some sort of an unknown defect or failure. It has nothing to do
with the OS. Dell needs to send you a new enclosure, plain and simple.
Scott
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 02:16:58PM +0100, VeeJay wrote:
I have asked the system manufacturers (Dell) but they don't provide support
for FreeBSD based systems [?]
Thats why I have only hope here with FreeBSD List...
I've CC'd Scott Long, who is the author of the mfi(4) driver. He should
be able to explain what the error messages mean.
Scott, check out the URL below.
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 01:29:11PM +0100, VeeJay wrote:
If it looks healthy, why there are these errors on the screen? Is it
controller problem or disk?
SCSI normally reports 3 things when it encounters an error (particularly
disk errors): Sense Key (SK), Additional Sense Code (ASC), and
Additional Sense Code Qualifier (ASCQ).
What appears in the below screenshot is a large amount of sense data,
but I can't make heads or tails out of it, because it's written in a
driver-centric manner ("Encl PD" means nothing to me). I can read part
of the CDB data, but it doesn't tell me much. Scott Long might know.
http://digitalfreaks.org/~lavalamp/20081023_server3_screen_dump.png
You should try asking the system manufacturer if they know what any
of the data means.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: VFS KPI was Re: [OpenAFS-devel] Re: AFS ... or equivalent ...
Rick Macklem wrote: On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, Robert Watson wrote: [good stuff snipped] Right now we maintain a relatively stable VM/VFS KPI withing a major release (i.e, FreeBSD 6.0 -> 6.1 -> 6.2 -> 6.3), but see fairly significant changes between major releases (5.x -> 6.x -> 7.x, etc). I expect to see further changes in VFS for 8.x (and some of the locking-related ones have already started going in). This is loosely related to both the OpenAFS thread and the Mac OS X ZFS port thread, so I thought I'd ask... Has anyone considered trying to bring the FreeBSD VFS KPI (and others, for that matter) closed to the Darwin/Mac OS X ones? The Apple folks made quite dramatic changes to their VFS when going from Panther (very FreeBSD like) to Tiger, but seemed to have stabilized, at least for Leopard. It just seems that using the Mac OS X KPIs might leverage some work being done on both sides? (I don't know if there is an OpenAFS port to Mac OS X or interest in one, but I would think there would be a use for one, if it existed?) Although I'm far from an expert on the Mac OS X VFS (when I ported to it, I just cribbed the code and it worked:-), it seems that they pretty well got rid of the concept of a vnode-lock. If the underlying file system isn't SMP safe, it can put a lock on the subsystem at the VFS call. (I think it optionally does a global lock or a uses an smp lock in the vnode, but don't quote me on this. My code currently runs with the thread-safe flag false in the vfs_conf structure entry, which enables the automagic locking.) Both Solaris and OSX seem to have found the path out of the VFS locking woods, and it would indeed be really nice if FreeBSD could follow suit. You're not the first to suggest the vnode locking move out of VFS and into the filesystems. I think that the work it would take to adapt the existing filesystems to this design would be far less than the ongoing work by everyone to fight the old design (both in FreeBSD proper and in companies that do their own custom filesystems in FreeBSD), but it does come at a cost of making things like nullfs much harder, if not nearly impossible. I wish I had time to work on something like this, but I encourage others to look into it and experiment. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Don't buy AMD products (was Re: Xorg and ATI card query.)
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: Sean Bryant wrote: Andrew Reilly wrote: On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:17:00 -0800 (PST) Doug Ambrisko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One thing that is a plus with nv is that X has some support for it, whereas, the newer ati cards have no support :-( I was a fan of ati since it was easier to get support. Now I'm starting to lean towards Nvidia :-( Does anyone know if there are *any* contemporary graphics cards that have 3D acceleration supported by some flavour of open-source x.org? Doesn't have to be a super-fast 'leet gamer system to be better than a non-accelerated frame buffer. Matrox used to have a reputation for goodness (I used to have a G400 or the like), but it's been a long time... (I'm currently using a lowish-end NVidia card under the x.org nv driver, but it has issues (of which no 3D accel is but one...) Cheers, Try the 'vesa' xorg driver. It may not be fancy or all that accelerated but it works quite well. I have an nvidia card and cannot get it to work for the life of me. the drive attached, but nothing happens after that. It might be the fact that I have a PCI express card. But the vesa driver is working just fine for me. I had a PCI-X nvidia card PCI-X? Or PCI Express? PCI-X is not the same thing. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap file vs swap partition
Aloha Guy wrote: Thanks for the input. You do have good points. The only issue with swap partitions is that it seems like you need to increase it everytime you increase the physical memory. Is there a swap partition size limit that pretty much will handle anything and setting a number larger than that will really not offer anything? John Processors and memory have vastly outpaced the speed of disks; any amount of swapping is going to be percieved as being very slow and something that should be avoided. Since RAM is also very cheap now, most people just load enough RAM into their system to handle their load, and then configure enough swap to hold a crashdump of that RAM. You always want swap so that you can handle unexpected spikes in load without crashing, but it's less of an integral piece of normal system operation these days. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: swap file vs swap partition
Aloha Guy wrote: Greetings everyone: I am planning to build a few new boxes which will run -RELEASE and -CURRENT and I have a question about the swap file. In the past, I had always used a swap partition of 256MB since I originally had 128MB system memory in the 1990's but my system has been upgraded to 2GB and it seems the swap file would have more flexibility as I can just change the size of the swapfile if I needed to. My question is is there any difference in performance between a swap file versus a swap partition and can one run a system with a swap file instead of a swap partition? Yes. A swap file requires a pass through the filesystem code in order to figure out where each block is. Also, searching has not gotten me very far but are there any drawbacks to a swap file instead of a swap partition? I read somewhere that a few people seem to think that a swap file can't handle kernel crash dumps? That's correct, it cannot. Shouldn't it be the same as both of them occupy disk space and as long as the swap file is large enough, wouldn't it work? The crashdump code is written to assume that the dump space is completely contiguous, something that is not at all guaranteed by a swap file. While it would certainly be possible to modify it to make a pass through the filesystem like above, the intention of the crashdump code is also to be as simple as possible and to depend on as few kernel services as possible. When the system has crashed, who knows what can be trusted anymore, right? Also, filesystem corruption is a frequent cause of crashes; why risk that dumping to a swapfile might encounter corruption and trash your entire filesystem. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iir(4) driver (Was: Re: Safe card to replace for ICP Vortex GDT851...)
Ok guys, time for a small breather here. All these claims about EoE and orphanage and whatnot are a bit premature and underinformed. First, the iir driver is being worked on when the need arises. Several bugs were fixed in it a few months ago, and until Mark's recent series of mails on it, no other problems had been reported. So far there is only one person reporting unhappiness with it, which doesn't necessarily mean that there is systematic trouble with the driver or the hardware. Second, various Adaptec sources have confirmed that they do support FreeBSD. Making big statements in public that they don't, or that it's not up to ones' standards or hopes, isn't terribly useful or productive. I'd hate for FreeBSD to turn into That Other BSD that publically abuses and harasses vendors for percieved sleights. There are much more positive and product ways to fix problems and form good relationships, and those ways are actively being pursued by some people right now. And here again is my standard disclaimer: I highly recommend that anyone who takes their data integrity seriously should spend time qualifying any RAID solution that they are interested in before putting it into production. What works for your workload might not work for someone else's workload, and vice-versa. Scott Patrick M. Hausen wrote: Hello! 'k, just to clarify here ... the new products won't be based on the iir(4) driver then? Yes, they won't. Basically, should the iir(4) driver be considered EOE also? As far as Adaptec and ICP Vortex are concerned, yes. Since the driver is Open Source, there is no enforced EOE, just "orphanage", if nobody is willing to work on it. Regards, Patrick M. Hausen Leiter Netzwerke und Sicherheit ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: SATA300 Controllers
Wilko Bulte wrote: On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 08:02:55PM -0500, Derrick T. Woolworth wrote.. Hello all, Sorry for cross-posting, but these issues seem relevant for lists... Has anyone had success with SATA300 controllers with FreeBSD 6.1? I've been trying Promise and nVidia nForce4 and I'm not having any luck. Using a MSI K8NGM2-L motherboard and others, but 6.1's installation hangs as soon as it sees ad4. I've also tried using an Adaptec 1210SA controller and had zero Well, just as a datapoint this works fine for me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~: dmesg|grep -i Prom atapci0: port 0xd480-0xd4ff,0xd000-0xd0ff mem 0xf7ff6000-0xf7ff6fff,0xf7fa-0xf7fb irq 21 at device 13.0 on pci2 ar0: 238475MB status: READY [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~: uname -a FreeBSD freebie.xs4all.nl 6.1-STABLE FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE #2: Wed Jun 14 22:01:33 CEST 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/FREEBIE i386 Promise has a good relationship with FreeBSD, I would expect their controllers to work pretty well. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Please help - adaptec 2820sa not allowing installation
Ensel Sharon wrote: I did all my due diligence, I contacted freebsd-fs and _made sure_ that even though the 2820sa is not listed by name in the HCL, that I could take a 6.1-RELEASE cd and install freebsd on a 2820sa. I was _assured_ that these cards are supported in 6.1-RELEASE, that all is well, and I could install and that was that. No, you were not assured, at least not by when we discussed this last week. I told you that I personally did not guarantee that it worked, only that I had heard reports that it did. You have two variables here. One is that it's an array that is larger than what the aac driver has supported in the past. Second is that it's RAID-6. Both of these variables should be handled by the aac driver update that happened last year, but again, I couldn't validate it, so I can only go with the reports of others. As others suggested, you need to experiment with simplier configurations. This will help us identify the cause and hopefully implement a fix. No one is asking you to throw away money or resources. Since you've already done the simple test with a single drive, could you do the following two tests: 1. RAID-5, full size (whatever >2TB value you were talking about). 2. RAID-6, <2TB. From there, I'll figure out what needs to be done to get it fully working for you. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Please help - adaptec 2820sa not ... RESOLVED
Eric Anderson wrote: Ensel Sharon wrote: On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Jahilliya wrote: Ok, aac is in the dmesg. I can see both 2820sa cards in the dmesg, and I see no errors, etc. - there are just no drives listed in dmesg. My setup is 8 500 Gb drives in a single raid-6 array, size ~2.8TB. Any problems with that ? Perhaps sysinstall cannot deal with a >2TB drive ? There are no other drives in the system besides the single 2.8TB raid 6 array ... Have you got any other drives you can attach to the raid? If so, disconnect the 8 drives connected, connect up a couple that are not part of the raid and configure them as a simple raid 1 and see if the installers sees that raid. Or try any combination in drives to bring the raid size down below 2TB (I'm sure this limitation has been fixed.) Ok, the answer is that it has not been fixed. 6.1 sysinstall does in fact see both 2820sa controllers, and when I put in a single 160GB sata drive, it does see that single drive and I can install onto it, etc. Sysinstall does _not_ see my 2.7TB raid6 array. I suspect that if it were smaller than 2TB, it would see it correctly. I have a number of options with which to deal with this, all of which involve either wasting money or wasting disk space. Fantastic. Right - FreeBSD doesn't recognize >2TB LUNs. Wrong on several counts. First, the AAC driver does not present arrays to the system as SCSI LUNs. The traditional 2TB limit with 12 byte CDB issue simply doesn't exist with this driver. Second, the FreeBSD SCSI layer knows how to issue 16 byte CDBs to access >2TB, assuming that the target understands the 16-byte protocol. So no, there is no 2TB limit inherent to FreeBSD. The only limit is with individual drivers and with hardware. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Zero Copy, FreeBSD and Linus Torvalds opinion
Iantcho Vassilev wrote: Hello guys, in bsdnews.com i found this link http://kerneltrap.org/node/6506 and particulary this: "I claim that Mach people (and apparently FreeBSD) are incompetent idiots. Playing games with VM is bad. memory copies are _also_ bad, but quite frankly, memory copies often have _less_ downside than VM games, and bigger caches will only continue to drive that point home." What do you think about it? I claim that Linus is an attention whore. How about that? Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: 6.0-RELEASE/AMD64 Ram Capacity?
Gary Palmer wrote: On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 01:57:53PM -0700, Scott Long wrote: Storage drivers that simply will not work:: asr asr asr asr asr pst ida sym Any particular reason "asr" is listed 5 times? Did you mean to replace some of them with other drivers, or are you emphatically sure that asr is broken? :-) It's there to make a point. Do not buy asr hardware and expect it to work on amd64. The driver comes from the vendor, and the vendor hasn't had any interest in supporting it since 2001. There are many other vendors who make much higher quality cards and who are actively interested in supporting FreeBSD, so I recommend doing business with them. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: 6.0-RELEASE/AMD64 Ram Capacity?
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 02:43:20PM -0500, Nathan Vidican wrote: I seem to recall various threads relating to problems with machines running at or above 4GB ram... what if any issues still exist? The only potential issues are with specific drivers (e.g. ata). Search the amd64 mailing list archives for more discussion. Kris Ok, off the top of my head: Storage drivers that are known to work with amd64 and 4GB of RAM or more: aac amr iir (6.1 and above only) ips ahc ahd ciss arcmsr mpt isp Storage drivers that should work, but might need more testing and validation: twa twe mlx mly amd trm Storage drivers that are known to have problems under load: ata hptmv Storage drivers that simply will not work:: asr asr asr asr asr pst ida sym This list isn't definitive, and I've purposely excluded ISA controllers and controllers that are significantly out of date, but it's close enough to give you a good idea of what to shop for. Personally, I feel a bit bad that ata and sym aren't in the first group, but there are only so many hours in the day. Both present interesting challenges. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: 6.0-RELEASE/AMD64 Ram Capacity?
Nathan Vidican wrote: I seem to recall various threads relating to problems with machines running at or above 4GB ram... what if any issues still exist? We're currently operating with 2GB ECC Registered PC333 ram, but are finding a fairly constant usage of about 1700MB swap space; like to increase system memory, and installed motherboard supports 16 slots x 2GB DIMMS each (for 32Gb total) - but what about FreeBSD? System is running: - Apache (about 10-12 mod_perl httpd's @ 90MB ram each) - Apache (about 20-30 very basic httpds for static stuff @ 12Mb each) - Sendmail, including MimeDefang and SA processes at some 90MB each - MySQL 4.1 running about 70MB Ram - Samba (smbd's running at 30Mb ram each 30-50 in use at any time) - A number of Perl processes ranging from 1Mb - 900Mb each - Other misc, but the above are the major ones Just want to make sure no known issues exist (primarily with the above applications), comments anyone? The ATA driver is still a bit flakey with more than 4GB of RAM, so make sure that you are using either a modern SCSI controller or a RAID controller. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: FreeBSD's Visual Identity: Outdated?
Sam wrote: If we want to be taken seriously in the commercial world then we need to have the right image. Look ma, a strawman! The concern you're addressing is the sort of thing distros solved in the Linux world. Each typically has their own "image," installer, system config style, etc. More importantly for the "commercial world," though, they offer support and certification. The image alone just isn't the problem. Or a problem at all, I'd argue. Let's be honest -- if a ten-year-old made Beastie, then a mentally challenged 3-year-old made Tux (and large portions of the kernel, but I digress). Point being Johann, if the community rejects your work for the core project you can still make your own distro and release it. Give it a shot! Cheers, Sam The distro - vs - core release relationship is one of BSD's greatest strengths and weaknesses. It's a strength because there is no 'distro hell' like there is in linux. When you download FreeBSD, you get the same FreeBSD as everyone else; there is no confusion over how the config files are layed out, no differences in the base utilities, everything compiles the same way, etc. That is a huge benefit. But at the same time, it makes it really hard for people to branch out and experiment in the same way that a linux distro can. FreeSBIE is a good example of this happening and working, but it definitely has hurdles. Variety and competition makes the whole stronger, and at times FreeBSD seems a bit in-bred. To address this, I'm playing with ideas for changing the nature of a FreeBSD 'release' a bit to make it easier for outfits like FreeSBIE to build on top of it. Hopefully I'll have something to show for this in 6.0. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: FreeBSD's Visual Identity: Outdated?
jsha wrote: Hello. I am writing this e-mail hoping that someone will share my thoughts on how the world's best operating system should represent its attributes and users to the rest of the world. Being an architect as well as graphic designer, I feel it is about time for a complete revamp of the visual aesthetics of the FreeBSD project. The current logo and everything pertaining to it has long since lost its modern touch. I believe that if this image is strenghtened, so is the way outsiders view the FreeBSD project and the way they would judge it compared to other open source operating systems. 1. Not only is the logo misleading (associating evil) but it also looks like something 10-year-olds could produce in Paint Shop Pro ten years ago. OpenBSD has an artistic touch to theirs, however I was very disappointed when I heard that the new NetBSD logo was in effect. 2. If it wasn't for the interesting content and structure of the FreeBSD website, it would be among the less beautiful. Yes, it serves its purpose well by being simple and straight to the point. But a redesign could offer just the same -- simplicity and accuracy -- without being ugly. 3. The installation, even though it's text-only, could also be improved by simple restructuring to act more cognitive and human-centered than previously. Everything pertaining to the eye is important to improve. 4. There should be some kind of FreeBSD business card and letterhead available to all that support this project. How do I know though, that if I manage to pull together a team to work on this refined vision, that we won't be totally ignored even though we produce the most magnificent result? Anyone that are interested, please reply ;-) Sincerely, Johann Manaf Tepstad -- j. If you have the time, desire, and talent to address these issues, I'd love to see the results. I'd caution about being inflamatory in your first statement, though. The logo was definitely not done by a 10 yr old with PSPro, and it has emotional significance to many people. I'd definitely like to see what your ideas are for a replacement. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Panic With MPT driver on Opteron System
NMH wrote: Hello I am having a odd problem I hope someone can help with. I have a TYAN 2882 board with 4 gigs of memory and a single Opteron 248 Processor. I am using an Infortrend RAID controller that won't play nice with Adaptec at 320 speeds so I am using an LSI 1030 based PCI-X SCSI card instead of the built in Adaptec. Hence the mpt driver. The system is FreeBSD 5.4-PRERELEASE from March 2nd. The system runs very fast but when testing under somewhat heavy load the system will panic and freeze with: Panic: mpt_get_request: corrupted request free list (ccb) It was also reported that when trying to do a ps auxw it would sometimes (never happened to me) report that it was out of inodes. Which is insane. A screen capture of the frozen console can be seen at: http://pic2.picturetrail.com/VOL965/3391974/6964630/90153559.jpg This seems similiar to reports on both FreeBSD and NetBSD like: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-bugs/2004/03/03/0004.html And http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-bugs/2004/02/12/0003.html And: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi/2003-April/58.html Any assistance would be appreciatted. Thanks! N. I think that you're seeing the effects of the driver having extremely broken error recovery. This is a known problem, and a fix will likely be going into the tree soon. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec AAC raid support
Theo de Raadt wrote: I'm not stuffing anything down anyone's throats. You are insulting me on public lists. You are, thus, also telling your users not to bother your beloved Adaptec. You're telling them what the binary which you worked on is the best they are going to get. I'm enabling FreeBSD users to use the resources that are available to them. By attacking my efforts, you are telling them that the aaccli you worked on is the best they are going to get, and that participating with what I am doing is foolish. That's quite different than cancelling developer work and threatening to remove a driver due to a political dispute. The driver is not shipping because traction must be gained against a vendor who you are apologizing for. Freedom isn't about coercing others to believe the same things that I believe. Freedom is something one fights for. Freedom is not something that just happens. Freedom is something that happens when someone puts their toes out there, with a stance, an attempt, a struggle. Freedom is not something that happens when Scott long makes apologies for Adaptec and slags Theo on public sites ... when Theo decides to use his project to take action against non-freedom from a vendor. I am trying to do something to create greater freedom. You are not helping with my effort. Nor are you are not standing on the sidelines. You're FIGHTING ME. You are on Adaptec's closed side. I personally don't care about Adaptec anymore, but I do care about the people there. More than you care about getting the best freedom for FreeBSD or *BSD, or about the *other* people in the FreeBSD who might want that effort. No. You would rather stand up for the people at Adaptec. If LSI or whoever else can provide better support, then that's fine with me. I do however have quite a bit of experience in knowing how things work at Adaptec and knowing what compromises can be made. Then help me. Don't slag me. Then I'll return to my original statement and say that you never sought out my help. I don't follow OpenBSD, but I would have been happy to lend whatever help I could with resources and contacts if you had contacted me long ago. Adaptec isn't one person, it isn't Doug Richardson or any other single individual. They do make a whole lot of stupid mistakes and close doors on opportunities, but there is no reason to vilify Doug for it. Then help me. I am not vilifying Doug. Doug said we should go through him. Now he's getting mails from people, because he said we should go THROUGH HIM. It's your standard tactic of, "hey everyone, so-and-so isn't meeting my demands on my timeline, so here's his email adress! Go and mailbomb him!" I think that Doug is doing everything that he can right now to satisfy not only OpenBSD, but everyone. However, it takes time, and just because he's not meeting your timeline doesn't mean that he's giving you the run around or that you should start making silly threats that will only hurt your users. I'm done with this thread. A closed binary managmeent app isn't ideal, but it's better than nothing. I worked on it because I knew the compromises I could make at the time and I wanted to give the FreeBSD community something for it. I don't have infinite time and resources to fight the noble causes like Theo does, and I think that cooperation and comprise are better in the long run than constant conflict. If Theo or anyone else wants help on making the kernel driver better, let me know. If they want to help Adaptec follow through on it's stated plan to release suitable tools in the near future, then stop antagonizing them and making silly threats. The shouting and the threats and all the other tripe reflect poorly on everyone, whether you choose to see it or not, and _that's_ what I oppose in Theo, not his passion for openness. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec AAC raid support
Theo de Raadt wrote: What part of the FreeBSD AAC driver is closed, emcumbered, or otherwise non-free? The bits that do management. Therefore, the bits that let it do what RAID controllers are meant to do. Can you fully operate an aac(4) card -- 100% of it's abilities, on a FreeBSD machine, without using a binary only tool downloaded from the Dell web site? Are you being obtuse on purpose? Why don't you admit it. FreeBSD relies on non-free binary code for Adaptec raid management. Yes, I admit this. And people thank me all the time for it. You can't even put it onto a FreeBSD distribution CD. Why do you keep discussing the free stuff, and distracting everyone from the non-free bits? Is it because you used to work for Adaptec? Are you paid to distract people from the non-free code? No, but you're paranoid and refusing help. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec AAC raid support
It's not a binary driver, it's a 2-clause BSD licensed driver that contains full source. You said that the OpenBSD driver is unstable, so I offered to help. That has nothing to do with binary apps. Deleting it from the OpenBSD tree is always an option, of course. Scott Jason Crawford wrote: The OpenBSD community doesn't want help for closed utilities and drivers. All we want is documentation. No source, no binary-only-cannot-distrubute drivers and utilities, just enough documenatation for which to write their drivers, and support oursevles. No one has been able to answer us on how releasing just documentation would lose them so much business that it's worth losing all this business. Jason On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:21:19 -0700, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jason Crawford wrote: The problem is that the AAC driver doesn't work. My 3.6-stable dell poweredge server with that raid controller crashes at least once a week because of the raid controller driver. There is nothing wrong with fighting for something that you want, and neither you nor Doug have been that helpful. All Doug did was give Theo the run-around by saying, don't worry, we'll be coming out with all new stuff! Which he neglected to mention that they wouldn't be opening documentation for either, at least enough to write a stable driver and management utility. Adaptec would not be losing any money for just releasing enough docs to let someone else write their own driver and management utility TO USE ADAPTEC'S HARDWARE. They'd be generating more business. This attitude so far has been quite productive, the OpenBSD community has gotten many wireless firmware's and drivers completely open, not to mention Theo getting the FSF award. I'd say that is pretty damn productive. Jason If the OpenBSD driver is buggy, then ask for help. I don't normally monitor the OpenBSD mailing lists and I don't run it at home, so I have no idea what the state of it is. I do, however, answer email from developers from other projects who contact me. The hardware is tricky to get right and there are bugs in different cards and different firmware versions that often need to be worked around. It's all documented in my driver, and I'm happy to share my knowledge. Scott On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:08:06 -0700, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Adam wrote: On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 12:34:09 -0700, Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I would have been happy to help. Heck, I might have even ported the management app (AACCLI, not a GUI, btw) for you like I did for FreeBSD. Barring that, I would have been happy to show you how to do the linux compat shims for the driver so that you could use the Linux AACCLI on OpenBSD. But no, you never contacted me. Does everyone who's worked at adaptec have such big problems with reading comprehension? Nobody wants a maybe working, cludgy, binary only tool. How would giving the developers something they don't want be considered "helping"? Adam I can't see how the All Or Nothing attitude here is productive. Good, you guys want to produce fully open and unencumbered stuff. That's wonderful. But why is it so important to go around screaming and yelling about it and alientating those who do try to help? Let me tell you, Doug is about the most positive and supportive guy you'll ever have at Adaptec, pissing him off really won't produce results. Why is it so important to drag your users into your political fights by depriving them of stuff that works now but isn't exactly everything that you want? I'd love to have fully open stuff from all the RAID companies too, but I also want the users of FreeBSD to be able to use the resources that are out there to their full advantage and not be pinned down by my political beliefs on the subject. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: aac support
Theo de Raadt wrote: re: http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=10032&offset=15&rows=28 See a posting from Scott Long of FreeBSD; --- Thanks for going to a public forum and saying I am full of crap. I really appreciate that. Boy, you sure do want to see all of our projects do well, don't you. Apparently you have zero idea of where we are going. While you are content with shipping binary stuff in your source tree and in your ports tree, we are not. We do not ship binaries. We are not interested in shipping a binary for some CLI. We actually do have the Linux CLI working in emulation, but we will not supply it to our user community. I have cancelled that effort by that developer. We will not supply something to our user community that they cannot fix and improve themselves. We have been talking with Adaptec for 4 months. They have not given us management information. We have been talking to Adaptec for more than a year to get other RAID controller information, as in, how to even get the mailbox stuff fixed. They have not given that to us, either. Noone thought to talk to you. You are, I am sure, under a non-disclosure agreement with Adaptec, and I am sure you would therefore not give us documentation. We are quite used to FreeBSD and Linux people signing NDA's by now. Yesterday on the phone Doug said "But we did give OpenBSD documentation, we gave them to Scott Long". Thus, Doug mentioned that *you* had documentation, and thought that was enough. Of course it is not. You do not help us, I told him. That is not how it works. And so it stands -- we still have no documentation. Did I get an offer from you for documentation before you went onto a public site and said I was full of crap? No, I did not. And I expect that now that you have said I am full of crap, we still will get no documentation from you. Right? We are working on a driver-independent raid management framework. One command (perhaps called raidctl(4), we don't know) that should work on any controller from any vendor, which would do management, because the management stuff would be abstracted in a driver-independent way into each driver. Yes this is a difficult project. We have support for AMI almost working. We will support some other product, as well, then we'll see where Adaptec stands. I do a lot of work on OpenBSD. I am sure that you do a lot of work on your stuff in FreeBSD too, so you know what it is to be a very busy busy person. When a vendor ignores me and the efforts of 4 other people trying to get the vendor to listen -- for that long, we have no choice. Yet, you, Scott, you think that you are therefore able to slag us and call us wrong, because YOU are in the loop and we are not? Because you used to WORK at Adaptec, and we did not? That somehow makes us full of crap? I have been watching the mail going to Doug over the last 24 hours. I have been counting controllers mentioned in mails and am now up to over 1,800 Adaptec RAID controllers, with people from very large commercial operations complaining that they have been switching to other controllers (or, having now seen Adaptec's failure in this regard, that they will now actively not buy Adaptec again). Those controllers will not be supported in OpenBSD 3.7 in May. If Adaptec wishes them to be supported in a future release, they had better come and make amends. We are sick of supporting the hardware of vendors who shit on their customers via us. Maybe they can repair this horrid situation enough that we will once again support their controllers by the time OpenBSD 3.8 ships in November. Quite frankly, you don't understand what we are trying to do, and Scott, this is just like the binary only Atheros driver that FreeBSD ships. I like it when all hardware is supported with source code, but just because our methods for getting there are different than yours, Scott, that gives you absolutely no right to go posting such a thing as you did there. Shame on you. Oh boo hoo. You never contacted me. Others in that past have. No, I can't now and never could before give out docs, but I've always been happy to help, review code, point out bugs, etc. Ask the BSD/OS guys, ask the OSDL guys, on and on and on. And as for trying to expose my evil conspriarcy against OpenBSD via Doug, you might want to leave him out of it. If you have questions, ask them and I'll do my best to answer them. Otherwise, stop crying that no one will help you. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Intel EMT64 Xeon vs AMD Opteron
Astrodog wrote: On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 19:38:43 -0800, Astrodog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 11:37:08 +0100 (CET), Claus Guttesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Cost wise, AMD Opteron 246 is roughly the same cost as a 3.0Ghz Xeon ... But how do they compare performance wise; specifically related to FreeBSD? We have a dual xeon (nocona) @ 3.2 GHz and a dual opteron @ 2 GHz, both with 4 GB RAM and running the amd64-port. My impression is that the opteron performs *slightly* better than it's Intel-cousin. regards Claus ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" From what I understand, EM64T is essentally an extention to x86, so it will understand the AMD64 instructions, much the same way an Athlon64 does. Opteron, once again, from what I've read on the topic is "Actual" 64-bit, not an emulated version. Generally, I find Opteron to be the best "Bang for your Buck", though what motherboard, and what features you need there may also play a role there. AMD, so far, has implied that the dual core opterons will be Socket 940, If that pans out, the 940-based solution will be significantly more expandable, since there's little to no chance of Intel continuing to use their current Xeon socket when their Dual Core offerings come out, and I suspect it would be technically impossible, given the Memory Controller issues that its bound to create. Since AMD put the memory controller on-die, they can resolve this issue in the core, and not involve the chipsets of the motherboard itself. Remember, Hyperthreading isn't dual core, its kinda like adding another "Lane" to the processing pipeline of a single processor, so that when something stalls, other things can still happen. Hypertransport, on the other hand is AMD's method of connecting SMP CPUs to eachother, memory, and devices on the motherboard. Sorry about the Hypertransport/Hyperthreading thing, but there seems to be a great deal of confusion about what each are, and what's good/bad about them, and they relate to the AMD/Intel decsion you're making pretty explicitly. Personally, I say go with the Opteron. Worst case, performance and reliability are the same, and you're supporting the underdog. Best case, it blows your socks off, and in a year, you can go dual core. Either way, you can't loose. Harrison Grundy D'oh. One other thing. In the benchmarks I've seen, Opterons "Play Nicer" with SMP because of the Hypertransport setup in some applications. (IE, they don't fight over memory the way Xeons do). Look for a motherboard that uses a "4+4" or "4+2" memory configuration to take full advantage of this. (Differnt memory for each processor, kinda) With FreeBSD, it's a bit of a toss-up. There is no strong affinity set or enforced between process memory and where the process is running. Having some notion of affinity (i.e. NUMA support) would be a good thing. Oh, and the 4+2 configurations are typically pretty poor, regardless. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Intel EMT64 Xeon vs AMD Opteron
Astrodog wrote: On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 11:37:08 +0100 (CET), Claus Guttesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Cost wise, AMD Opteron 246 is roughly the same cost as a 3.0Ghz Xeon ... But how do they compare performance wise; specifically related to FreeBSD? We have a dual xeon (nocona) @ 3.2 GHz and a dual opteron @ 2 GHz, both with 4 GB RAM and running the amd64-port. My impression is that the opteron performs *slightly* better than it's Intel-cousin. regards Claus ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" From what I understand, EM64T is essentally an extention to x86, so it will understand the AMD64 instructions, much the same way an Athlon64 does. Opteron, once again, from what I've read on the topic is "Actual" 64-bit, not an emulated version. Generally, I find Opteron to be the best "Bang for your Buck", though what motherboard, and what features you need there may also play a role there. AMD, so far, has implied that the dual core opterons will be Socket 940, If that pans out, the 940-based solution will be significantly more expandable, since there's little to no chance of Intel continuing to use their current Xeon socket when their Dual Core offerings come out, and I suspect it would be technically impossible, given the Memory Controller issues that its bound to create. Since AMD put the memory controller on-die, they can resolve this issue in the core, and not involve the chipsets of the motherboard itself. Remember, Hyperthreading isn't dual core, its kinda like adding another "Lane" to the processing pipeline of a single processor, so that when something stalls, other things can still happen. Hypertransport, on the other hand is AMD's method of connecting SMP CPUs to eachother, memory, and devices on the motherboard. Sorry about the Hypertransport/Hyperthreading thing, but there seems to be a great deal of confusion about what each are, and what's good/bad about them, and they relate to the AMD/Intel decsion you're making pretty explicitly. Personally, I say go with the Opteron. Worst case, performance and reliability are the same, and you're supporting the underdog. Best case, it blows your socks off, and in a year, you can go dual core. Either way, you can't loose. Both the AMD and Intel offering are just extensions to the ia32 design. Opteron is no more 'true' 64-bit than Nacona is. There are differences in features; Opteron and Athlon64 have dropped some legacy features, EM64T doesn't (yet) have NX page protection support, etc, etc. Beyond that, they operate in pretty much identical ways. Where Opteron has the advantage is that it doesn't have the long instruction pipeline of Nacona, and it has HyperTransport and an embedded memory controller instead of Intel MCH bottleneck. Nacona has Hyperthreading, which can be a benefit, but it's mostly a toss-up. As far as a real-world comparison, I just did a 6-CURRENT buildworld on the following machines: 2x Nacona 2.8GHz, HTT enabled 4GB RAM FreeBSD 6-CURRENT/i386 (32 bit mode) ICH5 SATA, Maxtor 2x Opteron 246 2GB RAM FreeBSD 6-CURRENT/amd64 (64 bit mode) Adaptec U160 SCSI, Seagate The time to build world was almost identical at 31 minutes each. Granted, the buildworld test isn't a very good overall test as it's often I/O bound, but it gives a rough estimate. I haven't spent much time running the Nacona in 64 bit mode, but what I did didn't suggest that it would perform all that much better. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Sony autoloader
Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Jan 07), Jeff Tollison said: pciconf -lv for the slot says: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:7:0: class=0x01 card=0x80101191 chip=0x80101191 rev=0x01 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Acard Technology Corp' device = 'ATP870 Ultra Wide SCSI Contoller (AEC6712UW)' class= mass storage subclass = SCSI Unfortunately, I don't think there are any FreeBSD drivers for Acard controllers. There are about 3 requests a year asking about Acard support, so unless one of them volunteers to write a driver, you may be better off getting a cheap Adaptec or Symbios card. There looks to be a linux driver, so writing one for FreeBSD shouldn't be impossible. Where does one get one of these cards? Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: FreeBSD's Visual Identity: Outdated?
Sam wrote: If we want to be taken seriously in the commercial world then we need to have the right image. Look ma, a strawman! The concern you're addressing is the sort of thing distros solved in the Linux world. Each typically has their own "image," installer, system config style, etc. More importantly for the "commercial world," though, they offer support and certification. The image alone just isn't the problem. Or a problem at all, I'd argue. Let's be honest -- if a ten-year-old made Beastie, then a mentally challenged 3-year-old made Tux (and large portions of the kernel, but I digress). Point being Johann, if the community rejects your work for the core project you can still make your own distro and release it. Give it a shot! Cheers, Sam The distro - vs - core release relationship is one of BSD's greatest strengths and weaknesses. It's a strength because there is no 'distro hell' like there is in linux. When you download FreeBSD, you get the same FreeBSD as everyone else; there is no confusion over how the config files are layed out, no differences in the base utilities, everything compiles the same way, etc. That is a huge benefit. But at the same time, it makes it really hard for people to branch out and experiment in the same way that a linux distro can. FreeSBIE is a good example of this happening and working, but it definitely has hurdles. Variety and competition makes the whole stronger, and at times FreeBSD seems a bit in-bred. To address this, I'm playing with ideas for changing the nature of a FreeBSD 'release' a bit to make it easier for outfits like FreeSBIE to build on top of it. Hopefully I'll have something to show for this in 6.0. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: FreeBSD's Visual Identity: Outdated?
jsha wrote: Hello. I am writing this e-mail hoping that someone will share my thoughts on how the world's best operating system should represent its attributes and users to the rest of the world. Being an architect as well as graphic designer, I feel it is about time for a complete revamp of the visual aesthetics of the FreeBSD project. The current logo and everything pertaining to it has long since lost its modern touch. I believe that if this image is strenghtened, so is the way outsiders view the FreeBSD project and the way they would judge it compared to other open source operating systems. 1. Not only is the logo misleading (associating evil) but it also looks like something 10-year-olds could produce in Paint Shop Pro ten years ago. OpenBSD has an artistic touch to theirs, however I was very disappointed when I heard that the new NetBSD logo was in effect. 2. If it wasn't for the interesting content and structure of the FreeBSD website, it would be among the less beautiful. Yes, it serves its purpose well by being simple and straight to the point. But a redesign could offer just the same -- simplicity and accuracy -- without being ugly. 3. The installation, even though it's text-only, could also be improved by simple restructuring to act more cognitive and human-centered than previously. Everything pertaining to the eye is important to improve. 4. There should be some kind of FreeBSD business card and letterhead available to all that support this project. How do I know though, that if I manage to pull together a team to work on this refined vision, that we won't be totally ignored even though we produce the most magnificent result? Anyone that are interested, please reply ;-) Sincerely, Johann Manaf Tepstad -- j. If you have the time, desire, and talent to address these issues, I'd love to see the results. I'd caution about being inflamatory in your first statement, though. The logo was definitely not done by a 10 yr old with PSPro, and it has emotional significance to many people. I'd definitely like to see what your ideas are for a replacement. Scott ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
[FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE Announcement
It is my great pleasure and privilege to announce the availability of FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE. This release marks a milestone in the FreeBSD 5.x series and the beginning of the 5-STABLE branch of releases. Some of the many changes since 5.2.1 include: - A binary compatibility interface has been introduced for the i386 platform that allows running Microsoft Windows NDIS network drivers natively in the kernel. - The network and socket subsystems are now multi-threaded and reentrant. This allows for much better use of SMP parallelism when processing and forwarding local and remote network traffic. - The development environment has been updated to GCC 2.4.2, Binutils 2.15, and GDB 6.1 - The choices for graphical environments have been updated to include X.org 6.7, Gnome 2.6.2 and KDE 3.3.0. There has also been a significant focus on testing and bug-fixing with this release, as well as the freezing of most kernel and userland APIs. Users and vendors are encouraged to consider transitioning to it as FreeBSD 5.x is no longer considered a 'New Technology' release series. Information on migrating from FreeBSD 4.x to 5.x can be found at http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/5.3R/migration-guide.html For a complete list of new features and known problems, please see the release notes and errata list, available at: http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/5.3R/relnotes.html http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/5.3R/errata.html For more information about FreeBSD release engineering activities, please see: http://www.FreeBSD.org/releng Availability - FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE supports the i386, pc98, alpha, sparc64, amd64, and ia64 architectures and can be installed directly over the net using bootable media or copied to a local NFS/FTP server. Distributions for all architectures are available now. Please continue to support the FreeBSD Project by purchasing media from one of our supporting vendors. The following companies will be offering FreeBSD 5.3 based products: FreeBSD Mall, Inc.http://www.freebsdmall.com/ Daemonnews, Inc. http://www.bsdmall.com/freebsd1.html If you can't afford FreeBSD on media, are impatient, or just want to use it for evangelism purposes, then by all means download the ISO images. We can't promise that all the mirror sites will carry the larger ISO images, but they will at least be available from the following sites. MD5 checksums for the release images are included at the bottom of this message. Bittorrent -- Bittorrent distribution is being tested on an experimental basis. A collection of trackers for the release ISO images is available at http://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/5.3-torrent FTP --- ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp2.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp3.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp4.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp5.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp6.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp7.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp10.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp2.au.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp.cz.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp.fr.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp2.jp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp1.ru.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp2.ru.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp2.tw.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp3.us.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp10.us.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp11.us.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ ftp://ftp15.us.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ FreeBSD is also available via anonymous FTP from mirror sites in the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Lithuania, Amylonia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. Before trying the central FTP site, please check your regional mirror(s) first by going to: ftp://ftp..FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD Any additional mirror sites will be labeled ftp2, ftp3 and so on. More information about FreeBSD mirror sites can be found at: http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/mirrors-ftp.html For instructions on installing FreeBSD, please see Chapter 2 of The FreeBSD Handbook. It provides a complete installation walk-through for users new to FreeBSD, and can be found online at: http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install.html Acknowledgments Many companies donated equipment, network access, or man-hours to finance the release engineering activities for FreeBSD 5.2 including The FreeBSD Mall, Compaq, Yahoo!, Sentex Communications, Sandvine, Inc., FreeBSD Systems, Inc, and NTT/Verio. The release engineering team for 5.3-RELEASE includes: Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: SCSI errors with Adaptec 2200S RAID
Andre Albsmeier wrote: On Tue, 03-Aug-2004 at 23:31:52 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please cc replies directly to me, as I am not subscribed to the lists. With some help from here, I was able to get this RAID card to see our external DLT (QUANTUM 4000) SCSI tape drive by installing the aacp (pass through) driver in addition to the aac driver. camcontrol now works, as do basic mt commands and amcheck (amanda check). However, (amanda) dumps either hang, fail completely or fail after transfering very little data. On the console, I see: (sa0:aacp1:0:4:0): READ(06). CDB8 0 0 0 20 0 0 (sa0:aacp1:0:4:0): NO SENSE ILI (length mismatch): -24576 csi:0,0,0,1 At this point the device is completely unresponsive, and the only way to get the system to see it again is to reboot the whole server. I tried ordering a 3 ft cable, thinking I was pushing my luck with the 6 ft (I've had this problem with SCSI cables in the past), but the problem persists. The same drive (which has an active terminator) has been working fine for years on a different box using an Intel L440GX+ MB's on-board SCSI port. Once again, any helpful replies are greatly appreciated! Are you sure you are running a recent fw on your DLT4k? My DLTs used to behave badly with early fw revisions. Check out http://www.quantum.com/am/service_support/downloads/software/dlt4000.htm You can upgrade it by tape or use my software for updating the fw of SCSI devices on FreeBSD. -Andre This sounds like excellent advice. Note that the error messages that you are seeing are coming from the Adaptec firmware, not FreeBSD or the aac driver. Also, the aacp device and backing firmware support are really just hacks that exist to allow cdroms to be booted and drives to be flashed with new firmware. I've never heard of anyone running a tape drive in this fashion, so it will be quite interesting to see if newer firmware helps. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: IBM e325 ServeRAID-6M on FreeBSD 5.x
Ganbold wrote: Hi, We are planning to purchase IBM e325 server with ServeRAID-6M and Dual AMD Opteron 2.2Ghz CPU. Did somebody make FreeBSD 5.x work on IBM e325 server with ServeRAID-6M before? Are there any known problems and issues? Will FreeBSD 5.x work on it? thanks in advance, Ganbold The serveraid cards should work, but I haven't audited the driver for 64-bit cleanliness. I also haven't heard of any reports, positive nor negative, about it, so it's up to you if you want to experiment. If it doesn't work, let me know. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: LSI 20320R Raid Card
J.D. Bronson wrote: I have asked this and no one replied, but I have more information... The card seems very well supported (mpt) but yet when I setup a RAID MIRROR and it is resyncing - the card DOES tell Freebsd 5.2.1, but the message is unrecognized: Waiting 10 seconds for SCSI devices to settle mpt0: Unknown event 0xb mpt0: Unknown event 0xb GEOM: create disk da0 dp=0xc7b72050 = Is there plans to fix this so that the card and the driver can tell the OS whats going on? Thanks. The mpt and amr drivers are largely unmaintained right now as LSI no longer sponsors an engineer to take care of them. I'm not sure what else to say about that other than we would gladly accept a new maintainer. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec 2410SA starts doing this: aac0: COMMAND0xc551a7e8TIMEOUTAFTER 147 SECONDS (Modified by Chad Leigh -- Shire.NetLLC)
In between 5.0 and 5.1 I put some serious work into the driver to make it perform better. Unfortunately, I opened up an edge case that would result in a command being lost under extreme load. It was very hard to reproduce locally until I did some more performance work after 5.2. I finally made the driver so fast that I could reproduce the problem with ease, which then allowed me to figure it out. A band-aid went into 5.2.1, and the real fix (hopefully) is in 5.2-CURRENT. Scott Aaron Wohl wrote: We got command timeout with the aac driver off and on for about a year with a 5400s and various freebsd versions. Ive been sending Scott the info and he has tried various fixes. I switched one of the machines to 5.2.1 a couiple of weeks ago. It been ok so far. Buts sometimes it may go a month or two then happen a lot so hard to say for sure yet. When it has happened to us power cycling and rebooting gets it unwedged -- reset does not. On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:31:48 +0100, "Albert Shih" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: Le 05/03/2004 à 22:05:25-0700, Scott Long a écrit On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: Now the machine, when it tries to check the two aacd volumes on this controller, starts printing out this message below every 20 seconds or so and the disk volumes cannot be used. Each new IO attempt triggers a new set of these messages. The hex number after the COMMAND word is different for each new IO request but of course stays the same for repeated messages relating to the same original IO request aac0: COMMAND 0xc551a7e8 TIMEOUT AFTER 147 SECONDS I have googled on this and similar posts related to 2120S controllers all seemed to have different causes and fixes... I thought that 5.2.1 would have fixed all of this. This isn't good. Any hints or ideas on what is causing this? I can get into the controller at POST time and it checks out... Can you boot the machine at all? If so, could I feed you some patches to help diagnose the problem? Long time ago (humm 3 mounths ;-)) ) I've same problem with a Adaptec 2120S on FreeBSD 5.2 The reconstruction don't work and sometime the machin hang up with same kind of message. I solve the problem (after many time) by to remove the SCSI terminator on the array (where I put the hot-plug disk). Hope this help. Regards. -- Albert SHIH Universite de Paris 7 (Denis DIDEROT) U.F.R. de Mathematiques. Heure local/Local time: Wed Mar 17 10:29:24 CET 2004 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec 2410SA starts doing this: aac0: COMMAND 0xc551a7e8TIMEOUT AFTER 147 SECONDS (Modified by Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC)
Albert Shih wrote: Le 05/03/2004 à 22:05:25-0700, Scott Long a écrit On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: Now the machine, when it tries to check the two aacd volumes on this controller, starts printing out this message below every 20 seconds or so and the disk volumes cannot be used. Each new IO attempt triggers a new set of these messages. The hex number after the COMMAND word is different for each new IO request but of course stays the same for repeated messages relating to the same original IO request aac0: COMMAND 0xc551a7e8 TIMEOUT AFTER 147 SECONDS I have googled on this and similar posts related to 2120S controllers all seemed to have different causes and fixes... I thought that 5.2.1 would have fixed all of this. This isn't good. Any hints or ideas on what is causing this? I can get into the controller at POST time and it checks out... Can you boot the machine at all? If so, could I feed you some patches to help diagnose the problem? Long time ago (humm 3 mounths ;-)) ) I've same problem with a Adaptec 2120S on FreeBSD 5.2 The reconstruction don't work and sometime the machin hang up with same kind of message. I solve the problem (after many time) by to remove the SCSI terminator on the array (where I put the hot-plug disk). Hope this help. Regards. Termination problems are the source of many many SCSI problems. You need to be very careful to make sure you understand exactly what the termination requirements are of the system. Most hot-swap enclosures have internal termination, so connecting a cable to them that is also terminated with cause problems, as you seem to have observed. Unfortunately, the 2200/2120 cards try really really hard to hide these problems and make them invisible. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec 2410SA starts doing this: aac0: COMMAND 0xc551a7e8 TIMEOUT AFTER 147 SECONDS (Modified by Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC)
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote: > I originally sent this to -questions, but got no response. I hope this > is a good place to send this. While the drives and controller are > SATA, the driver is the SCSI aac driver for the adaptec raid, hence > this group. I would appreciate any attempts to help me understand what > is going on. I have flashed the latest BIOS and Firmware into the card > and upgraded FBSD to 5.2.1-RELEASE and it still has this problem > suddenly. Rebooting, etc have no effect. > I would appreciate being directly cc: ed on any replies, as I am > subscribed to -questions but not -scsi > thanks I rarely read the freebsd-questions@ list, but you are welcome to email me directly with aac driver questions. See below: > > Hi > > I have an Adaptec 2410SA RAID card with 3 drives attached, 2 in a RAID > 1 array and one as a separate disk. This has been working under > 5.2-RELEASE in my test server for some time now. However, for some > reason the machine locked up (may not be related) and I had to do a > hard reset. > > Now the machine, when it tries to check the two aacd volumes on this > controller, starts printing out this message below every 20 seconds or > so and the disk volumes cannot be used. Each new IO attempt triggers a > new set of these messages. The hex number after the COMMAND word is > different for each new IO request but of course stays the same for > repeated messages relating to the same original IO request > > aac0: COMMAND 0xc551a7e8 TIMEOUT AFTER 147 SECONDS > > I have googled on this and similar posts related to 2120S controllers > all seemed to have different causes and fixes... > I thought that 5.2.1 would have fixed all of this. This isn't good. > Any hints or ideas on what is causing this? I can get into the > controller at POST time and it checks out... Can you boot the machine at all? If so, could I feed you some patches to help diagnose the problem? Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: 4 CD ISOs for 5.2 ?
Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Tuesday 03 February 2004 23:20, Scott Long wrote: Kris Kennaway wrote: On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 04:52:14PM +0100, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Tuesday 03 February 2004 13:41, Kris Kennaway wrote: Only the first 2 CDs are made available on the FTP site. The other two contain a subset of packages; the full set of packages is available on the FTP site, just not in ISO format. Regarding the first cd: make release only creates a 'mini-install', not the 600M iso that is on the site. This one misses perl for one and some dependencies fail. AFAIK packages are included by hand. Correct. We've talked about enhancing the scripts so that this gets included automatically, but it can be problematic since the source location of the packages might be unknown at the time of the build. Do you mean the distfiles here, or the resulting packages? If talking about the packages, isn't it as simple as moving the $CHROOT_DIR/usr/ports/packages into $CHROOT_DIR/R/cdrom and using a similar approach as portupgrade? Otherwise an ls */*/*.tbz should print a workable list. If the distfiles, then one can advise in the release manpage, to do: /usr/src/release/scripts/print-cdrom-packages.sh 1 | xargs portinstall --fetch-only and then proceed with RELEASEDISTFILES argument. The only problem with this is that it's quite common during the RC and BETA phases for the package set to not yet be available through normal means. Life would be a lot simpler if portupgrade was moved into base :) Yeah, but that would require putting Ruby into the base, and you'd have an all-out revolt on your hands if that happened. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: 4 CD ISOs for 5.2 ?
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 04:52:14PM +0100, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Tuesday 03 February 2004 13:41, Kris Kennaway wrote: Only the first 2 CDs are made available on the FTP site. The other two contain a subset of packages; the full set of packages is available on the FTP site, just not in ISO format. Regarding the first cd: make release only creates a 'mini-install', not the 600M iso that is on the site. This one misses perl for one and some dependencies fail. AFAIK packages are included by hand. Correct. We've talked about enhancing the scripts so that this gets included automatically, but it can be problematic since the source location of the packages might be unknown at the time of the build. I followed release(7) and the docs on the site - how can I create the "official" disc1 and can that be done, without restarting the entire make release process? I don't know more specifics. Kris The 'rerelease' target will start up a build where it left off, without cleaning the CHROOTDIR area first. The RELEASENOUPDATE flag will prevent the scripts for doing a cvs update on the tree. Both of these are useful for restarting a paused build. Also, depending on what actions you want to modify or restart, you might need to remove certain makefile marker files at $CHROOTDIR/usr/obj/usr/src/release. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec 2120S management (raidutil) ?
Buki wrote: On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 10:17:34AM -0600, Scott Long wrote: Buki wrote: Hi, The old 'Storage Manager' and 'raidutil' tools do not work with the newer generation of Adaptec RAID cards. The newer genreation use 'Storage Manager Browser Edition' for the GUI and 'aaccli' for the CLI. I ported the aaccli program to FreeBSD a few years ago, but it has fallen out of date and I don't recommend using it with the 2120/2200 cards. You can, however, extract the Linux version of 'aaccli' from the CD that comes with the card and run it under FreeBSD. You'll need the normal linux compatibility tools, and you'll need to either compile your kernel with AAC_COMPAT_LINUX or load the 'aac_linux.ko' kernel module. OK, I probably should mention I am using FreeBSD 4.8 in which I failed to locate either aac_linux.ko or AAC_COMPAT_LINUX OTOH, aac_linux.ko exist under FreeBSD 5.1, but I don't want to use 5.x in production. But thanks anyway :) Scott Buki I apologize, the aac_linux.ko thing only exists in 5.x. However, the AAC_COMPAT_LINUX kernel option _does_ exist in all versions of FreeBSD after 4.1. I wrote the driver. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec 2120S management (raidutil) ?
Tuc wrote: I was wondering if there is some FreeBSD software to manage Adaptec 2120S RAID SCSI card. Looking through Adaptec web I found "Storage Manager 3.04" but it's quite old and it says "for 2100S, 3200S and 3400S" and I really have not got it to run. Then there is "CLI version 1.0 for FreeBSD 4.4-5", which seems to (sort of) work, but I don't see many options for the controller and I am sort of afraid to use it for 2120S :) There is no man page for it, just inline help... Can anybody help me with it? I use : asr0: mem 0xfa00-0xfbff irq 5 at device 8.0 on pci1 asr0: major=154 asr0: ADAPTEC 2110S FW Rev. 380E, 1 channel, 256 CCBs, Protocol I2O and I loaded the u160raid_sm_v304_fbsd411.tgz found on the site. Works fine for us. Tuc/TTSG Internet Services, Inc. The 2110S and 2120S cards have completely different internals and cannot be controlled by the same driver and applications. See my other email on questions@ about this. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Adaptec 2120S management (raidutil) ?
Buki wrote: Hi, I was wondering if there is some FreeBSD software to manage Adaptec 2120S RAID SCSI card. Looking through Adaptec web I found "Storage Manager 3.04" but it's quite old and it says "for 2100S, 3200S and 3400S" and I really have not got it to run. Then there is "CLI version 1.0 for FreeBSD 4.4-5", which seems to (sort of) work, but I don't see many options for the controller and I am sort of afraid to use it for 2120S :) There is no man page for it, just inline help... Can anybody help me with it? Buki Hi, The old 'Storage Manager' and 'raidutil' tools do not work with the newer generation of Adaptec RAID cards. The newer genreation use 'Storage Manager Browser Edition' for the GUI and 'aaccli' for the CLI. I ported the aaccli program to FreeBSD a few years ago, but it has fallen out of date and I don't recommend using it with the 2120/2200 cards. You can, however, extract the Linux version of 'aaccli' from the CD that comes with the card and run it under FreeBSD. You'll need the normal linux compatibility tools, and you'll need to either compile your kernel with AAC_COMPAT_LINUX or load the 'aac_linux.ko' kernel module. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Sound Blaster Live DD5.1
Emil A Eklund wrote: I believe the soundblasters in dell machines are special in some kind, I have a dell as well and the SB Live that came with it works fine under windows, but does not work at all under FreeBSD, however I had an old Live (exact same spec as the one that came with the machine) and it works just fine, I have no idea what's different about the dell ones. /Emil A Eklund On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 17:41, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: I have recently purchased a Dell Dimension 8250 which contains a Creative Labs SoundBlaster Live! DD 5.1 card. My previous SoundBlaster Live! card was detected in FreeBSD 4.7, but this one is not detected in this machine using FreeBSD 5.1 RELEASE (cvsup to it). No pcm devices show during boot. Is there a way to give the kernel a hint? There is no way to shut of PNP in the BIOS, as Dell as not added this option. Windows XP is showing: I/O Range: DC40-DC5F IRQ: 18 Thanks in advance, Tom Veldhouse Dell has a bad habit of using unique PCI-ID's for hardware that it buys from others. Can both of you do 'pciconf -lv' and post the output? It might very well be as easy as just adding the Dell IDs to the driver. Scott ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: A few 5.0-Release questions...
John Wilson wrote: Good day, After spending quite some time trying to get 5.0-RELEASE installed on a Dell PowerEdge machine, it seems that all is now working quite well. Being that these machines are somewhat common, I'll share what was halting my installation. What model? There are quite a few PowerEdges out there. I installed 5.0 (actually, I built the official 5.0 release) on a PowerEdge. These machines come with integrated video, an ATI RageXL, which is rather useless for anything other than console mode. I installed an ATI All- In-Wonder VE so that I could get somewhat decent performance out of X. The problem manifested when the kernel probed the machines hardware, causing an "NMI ISA 30, EISA ff", and locking up the machine solid. After I began pulling memory and expansion cards from the system, the error went away when I removed the ATI AIW card. I reinstalled the card and attempted to find how to correct this. My only solution to this issue was to interrupt the boot process and use the following command: set hw.pci.enable_io_modes = 0 This prevented any further halts. As a wild guess, what happenes when you remove the EISA device from the kernel? My first question is as follows: is /boot/device.hints the most proper place to stick this? Also, are there any other possible solutions to this issue? /boot/loader.conf is the best place for this. My main drives are SCSI, and I have one CD-RW and one DVD-R on the secondary IDE controller. The kernel detects the drives just fine, but defaults them both down to PIO4. The drives are fully UDMA2 capable. I am able to set the drives to use UDMA2 via atacontrol without issue. However, how would one make this more permanent, such that I wouldn't have to use atacontrol everytime I boot the machine? There have been problems in the past with ATAPI/IDE drives that claim DMA capabilities but instead corrupt data and/or cause panics. Forcing everything to PIO is the easiest way to achieve maximum compatibility. The ata manual page describes what to put into /boot/loader.conf to force them back using DMA. Back to the topic of video; is there _any_ way to permanently disable, or at least prevent FreeBSD from detecting the integrated video on the motherboard? There is nothing in the machines BIOS that would allow this. This would just be "nice" to do, as X works just fine, but it still sticks an entry into the XFree86Config file for the integrated chip. Does the motherboard have a jumper that will disable it? And finally... Where can one obtain a complete list of allowed hints for use in /boot/device.hints? I tried searching around the FBSD site as well as the handbook and found no listing, other than a line here and a line there. This has been desired for a long time, yes. There have been periodic pushes to do this, but they quickly loose steam or become outdated. Scott To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
