Re: EFI loader doesn't handle md_preload (md_image) correct?
Bezüglich Harry Schmalzbauer's Nachricht vom 16.05.2017 18:26 (localtime): > B … The issue is, that current UEFI implementation is using 64MB staging memory for loading the kernel and modules and files. When the boot is called, the relocation code will put the bits from staging area into the final places. The BIOS version does not need such staging area, and that will explain the difference. I actually have different implementation to address the same problem, but thats for illumos case, and will need some work to make it usable for freebsd; the idea is actually simple - allocate staging area per loaded file and relocate the bits into the place by component, not as continuous large chunk (this would also allow to avoid the mines like planted by hyperv;), but right now there is no very quick real solution other than just build efi loader with larger staging size. >>> Ic, thanks for the explanation. >>> While not aware about the purpose of the staging area nor the >>> consequences of enlarging it, do you think it's feasable increasing it >>> to 768Mib? >>> >>> At least now I have an idea baout the issue and an explanation why >>> reducing md_imgae to 100MB hasn't helped – still more than 64... >>> >>> Any quick hint where to define the staging area size highly appreciated, >>> fi there are no hard objections against a 768MB size. >>> >>> -harry >> The problem is that before UEFI Boot Services are not switched off, the >> memory is managed (and owned) by the firmware, > Hmm, I've been expecting something like that (owend by firmware) ;-) > > So I'll stay with CSM for now, and will happily be an early adopter if > you need someone to try anything (-stable mergable). Toomas, thanks for your help so far! I'm just curious if there's news on this. Was there a decision made whether kernel should be utilized to relocate the MD image modules or the loader should be extended to handle (x-)large staging areas? I'd like to switch back to UEFI booting for various reasons (most priority has consistency), but can't since it breaks md-rootfs with that machine (the other run ESXi still). If there's anything to test, please let me know. Thanks, -harry ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: EFI loader doesn't handle md_preload (md_image) correct?
> On 29. juuni 2017, at 11:24, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote: > > Bezüglich Harry Schmalzbauer's Nachricht vom 16.05.2017 18:26 (localtime): >> B > … > The issue is, that current UEFI implementation is using 64MB staging > memory for loading the kernel and modules and files. When the boot is > called, the relocation code will put the bits from staging area into the > final places. The BIOS version does not need such staging area, and that > will explain the difference. > > I actually have different implementation to address the same problem, > but thats for illumos case, and will need some work to make it usable > for freebsd; the idea is actually simple - allocate staging area per > loaded file and relocate the bits into the place by component, not as > continuous large chunk (this would also allow to avoid the mines like > planted by hyperv;), but right now there is no very quick real solution > other than just build efi loader with larger staging size. Ic, thanks for the explanation. While not aware about the purpose of the staging area nor the consequences of enlarging it, do you think it's feasable increasing it to 768Mib? At least now I have an idea baout the issue and an explanation why reducing md_imgae to 100MB hasn't helped – still more than 64... Any quick hint where to define the staging area size highly appreciated, fi there are no hard objections against a 768MB size. -harry >>> The problem is that before UEFI Boot Services are not switched off, the >>> memory is managed (and owned) by the firmware, >> Hmm, I've been expecting something like that (owend by firmware) ;-) >> >> So I'll stay with CSM for now, and will happily be an early adopter if >> you need someone to try anything (-stable mergable). > > Toomas, thanks for your help so far! I'm just curious if there's news on > this. > Was there a decision made whether kernel should be utilized to relocate > the MD image modules or the loader should be extended to handle > (x-)large staging areas? > > I'd like to switch back to UEFI booting for various reasons (most > priority has consistency), but can't since it breaks md-rootfs with that > machine (the other run ESXi still). > > If there's anything to test, please let me know. > > Thanks, > > -harry There has not been too much activities about this topic, except some discussions. But it is quite clear that this change has to be handled by the loader in first place - as we need to get the data in safe location; now of course there is secondary part as well - it may be that kernel would need some work as well, depending on how the md image(s) are to be handled in relation to memory maps. rgds, toomas ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work
Am 28. Juni 2017 22:38:52 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard : >A primary test is building lang/gcc5-devel under release/11.0.1 >and then using it under stable/11 or some draft of release/11.1.0 . Thank you, Mark. Let me know how it went. In the meantime I'll prepare the change for gcc5 itself. >It looks like the the lang/gcc5-devel build still creates and >uses the headers that go in include-fixed/ but that they are >removed from $(STAGEDIR}${TARGLIB} 's tree before installation >or packaging. > >So, if I understand right, lang/gcc5-devel itself still does use >the adjusted headers to produce its own materials but when >lang/gcc5-devel is used later it does not. Definitely >something to be testing since it is a mix overall. I am not worried about that since that should not cause any binary incompatibilities (ABI). The problem we encountered was about source code and API in a wide sense of that term. >Is some form of exp-like run needed that tries to force use >of a release/11.0.1 built lang/gcc5-devel (-r444563) to build >other things under, say, stable/11 or some draft of >release/11.1.0 ? Is this odd combination even possible >currently? I am not aware of it, and while originally I was thinking to request an -exp run (after the GCC version update which is dragging due to broken ports), time is not on our side and the change should be low risk. > [altermative approach] But I guess that did not work out. Not with my current level of connectivity and my notebook a dead brick on top of that. And my preference is to still build, but stow away (unless explicitly requested to keep). >Eventually most of the lang/gcc* 's will need whatever >technique is used. Yes, agreed. Version 5 is most important since it's the default; then 6; 4.x is for retro computing fans ;-), so 7 will then be next. Gerald ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work
On 2017-Jun-29, at 3:10 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Am 28. Juni 2017 22:38:52 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard dsl-only.net>: >> A primary test is building lang/gcc5-devel under release/11.0.1 >> and then using it under stable/11 or some draft of release/11.1.0 . > > Thank you, Mark. Let me know how it went. In the meantime I'll prepare the > change for gcc5 itself. I'm not currently set up to run more than head on any of amd64, powerpc64, powerpc, aarch64, or armv6/7 (which are all I target). And I'm in the middle of attempting a fairly large jump to head -r320458 on those. (powerpc 32-bit and 64-bit just failed for libc++ time-usage compiling now that 32-bit has 64-bit time_t, including in world32/lib32 contexts for powerpc64.) It will likely be a while before I manage to have a 11.x context (without losing my head contexts), much less examples from all "my" 5 TARGET_ARCH's. (Given past wchar_t type handling problems (e.g.) for gcc targeting powerpc family members I think it should be checked.) I'll have to find and set up disks: I do not even have such handy/ready at the moment. [I got into this area by being asked questions, not by my direct use of release/11.0.1 , stable/11 , or a draft of release/11.1.0 .] I'll let you know when I have some test results but others may get some before I do. > . . . >> Eventually most of the lang/gcc* 's will need whatever >> technique is used. > > Yes, agreed. Version 5 is most important since it's the default; then 6; 4.x > is for retro computing fans ;-), so 7 will then be next. [In my normal/head environment I'm switching to lang/gcc7-devel for gcc (from lang/gcc6 ) but I'm odd that way.] === Mark Millard markmi at dsl-only.net ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
redundant zfs pool, system traps and tonns of corrupted files
Hi. Say I'm having a server that traps more and more often (different panics: zfs panics, GPFs, fatal traps while in kernel mode etc), and then I realize it has tonns of permanent errors on all of it's pools that scrub is unable to heal. Does this situation mean it's a bad memory case ? Unfortunately I switched the hardware to an identical server prior to encountering zpools have errors, so I'm not use when did they appear. Right now I'm about to run a memtest on an old hardware. So, whadda you say - does it point at the memory as the root problem ? Thanks. Eugene. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: redundant zfs pool, system traps and tonns of corrupted files
Hi, On 29.06.2017 16:37, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. Say I'm having a server that traps more and more often (different panics: zfs panics, GPFs, fatal traps while in kernel mode etc), and then I realize it has tonns of permanent errors on all of it's pools that scrub is unable to heal. Does this situation mean it's a bad memory case ? Unfortunately I switched the hardware to an identical server prior to encountering zpools have errors, so I'm not use when did they appear. Right now I'm about to run a memtest on an old hardware. So, whadda you say - does it point at the memory as the root problem ? I'm also not quite getting the situation when I have errors on a vdev level, but 0 errors on a lower device layer (could someone please explain this): pool: esx state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may be affected. action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the entire pool from backup. see: http://illumos.org/msg/ZFS-8000-8A scan: resilvered 3,74G in 0h5m with 0 errors on Tue Dec 27 05:14:32 2016 config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM esx ONLINE 0 0 99,0K raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 113K da0 ONLINE 0 0 0 da1 ONLINE 0 0 0 da2 ONLINE 0 0 2 da3 ONLINE 0 0 0 da5 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1-1 ONLINE 0 0 84,7K da12ONLINE 0 0 0 da13ONLINE 0 0 1 da14ONLINE 0 0 0 da15ONLINE 0 0 0 da16ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: 25 data errors, use '-v' for a list pool: gamestop state: ONLINE status: One or more devices has experienced an error resulting in data corruption. Applications may be affected. action: Restore the file in question if possible. Otherwise restore the entire pool from backup. see: http://illumos.org/msg/ZFS-8000-8A scan: scrub in progress since Thu Jun 29 12:30:21 2017 1,67T scanned out of 4,58T at 1002M/s, 0h50m to go 0 repaired, 36,44% done config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM gamestopONLINE 0 0 1 raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 2 da6 ONLINE 0 0 0 da7 ONLINE 0 0 0 da8 ONLINE 0 0 0 da9 ONLINE 0 0 0 da11ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: 10 data errors, use '-v' for a list P.S. This is a FreeBSD 11.1-BETA2 r320056M (M stands for CTL_MAX_PORTS = 1024), with ECC memory. Thanks. Eugene. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: redundant zfs pool, system traps and tonns of corrupted files
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: > Hi, > > On 29.06.2017 16:37, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> >> Say I'm having a server that traps more and more often (different panics: >> zfs panics, GPFs, fatal traps while in kernel mode etc), and then I realize >> it has tonns of permanent errors on all of it's pools that scrub is unable >> to heal. Does this situation mean it's a bad memory case ? Unfortunately I >> switched the hardware to an identical server prior to encountering zpools >> have errors, so I'm not use when did they appear. Right now I'm about to run >> a memtest on an old hardware. >> >> >> So, whadda you say - does it point at the memory as the root problem ? Certainly a good guess. >> > > I'm also not quite getting the situation when I have errors on a vdev level, > but 0 errors on a lower device layer (could someone please explain this): ZFS checksums whole records at a time. On RAIDZ, each record is spread over multiple disks, usually the entire RAID stripe. So when ZFS detects a checksum error on a record stored in RAIDZ, it doesn't know which individual disk was actually responsible. Instead, it blames the RAIDZ vdev. That's why you have thousands of checksum errors on your raidz vdevs. The few checksum errors you have on individual disks might have come from the labels or uberblocks, which are not raided. -Alan ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 213903] Kernel crashes from turnstile_broadcast (/usr/src/sys/kern/subr_turnstile.c:837)
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213903 --- Comment #35 from Mateusz Guzik --- Hi there, sorry for late reply. This somehow fell through the cracks. First of all there is no kernel bug per se that I can see, rather a bug in the atom cpu which started manifesting itself. There were several changes to the affected code path on stable/11 and in particular the condition which triggered the bug is gone. I don't have any reports, but I suspect stable/11 is now cleared. stable/10 will require a hack, but I'll need someone to test it as don't have the hardware to reproduce. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 213903] Kernel crashes from turnstile_broadcast (/usr/src/sys/kern/subr_turnstile.c:837)
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213903 --- Comment #36 from Franco Fichtner --- You can use https://github.com/opnsense/src/commit/6b79b52c.patch on stable/10, it was verified working on 11.0. Cheers, Franco -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 213903] Kernel crashes from turnstile_broadcast (/usr/src/sys/kern/subr_turnstile.c:837)
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213903 --- Comment #37 from Cassiano Peixoto --- (In reply to Mateusz Guzik from comment #35) Mateusz, Yes i realized many changes has been made on 11-STABLE related to this issue. I think it could be fixed as well. Anyway i have a server running with 11.1-BETA3 to confirm. Regarding FreeBSD 10, i can test it for you, just provide a patch and let me know. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Problems attaching disks in Azure under 11.1-BETA2
I am trying to attach a brand new disk to an azure VM, and what I see is the disk attachng and detaching immediately like this: da2 at storvsc3 bus 0 scbus5 target 0 lun 0 da2: Fixed Direct Access SPC-2 SCSI device da2: 300.000MB/s transfers da2: Command Queueing enabled da2: 32768MB (67108864 512 byte sectors) da2 at storvsc3 bus 0 scbus5 target 0 lun 0 da2: detached g_access(918): provider da2 has error g_access(918): provider da2 has error g_access(918): provider da2 has error g_access(918): provider da2 has error (da2:storvsc3:0:0:0): Periph destroyed I have seen this before with an existing disk if I detahc and reattach wiht a new LUN numer, but never with a brand new disk. The command I am using to create this is below: az vm disk attach --vm-name az-london01 \ --resource-group ticketswitch-london \ --caching ReadWrite --new --size-gb 32 \ --sku Standard_LRS \ --disk az-london01-tank01 The only thing I could find in bug reports which is similar is this: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212914 But those patches should have gone in ages ago. Will try and find a workaround for now, but its a bit puzzling. -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
What is /dev/zfs?
Hi, folks any pointer to an explanation would be nice, there seems to be no zfs(4) manpage ... Reason for asking: I have a piece of software that uses 14,000 ioctl() calls on that device during one execution and I'm asking myself what it tries to do. Thanks! Patrick signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
Re: What is /dev/zfs?
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > Hi, folks > > any pointer to an explanation would be nice, > there seems to be no zfs(4) manpage ... > > Reason for asking: I have a piece of software > that uses 14,000 ioctl() calls on that device during > one execution and I'm asking myself what it tries > to do. > > Thanks! > Patrick The zpool and zfs commands do everything through ioctls, and /dev/zfs is the device node those ioctls are bound to. You can't read from it or write to it; all you can with /dev/zfs is use ZFS's custom ioctls. -Alan ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
[Bug 213903] Kernel crashes from turnstile_broadcast (/usr/src/sys/kern/subr_turnstile.c:837)
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213903 --- Comment #38 from Chris Collins --- (In reply to Mateusz Guzik from comment #35) Just to let you know my pfsense unit affected by this issue does not have an atom cpu. It has a celeron N3150 cpu. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
11.1-BETA3 uhub probes on warm boot triggers endless reboot cycle
Hi, I've got a dual boot system at home, booting into Windows 10 for games. I've noticed that since I updated to 11.1-BETA3, a reboot from Windows into FreeBSD results in a endless reboot cycle. In order to reboot FreeBSD, I have to cold-boot. The endless reboot cycle appears to be triggered when the kernel attempts to talk to "uhub", at which point it reboots, and the cycle repeats. No kernel panics, no crash cores. The issue is not a biggie, other than the time it takes for me to power down completely, wait for capacitors to discharge completely, and then cold boot the machine. However, I thought I'd bring it to the notice of list. Cheers. -- Jonathan Chen ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 11.1-BETA3 uhub probes on warm boot triggers endless reboot cycle
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:23:26AM +1200, Jonathan Chen wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a dual boot system at home, booting into Windows 10 for > games. I've noticed that since I updated to 11.1-BETA3, a reboot from > Windows into FreeBSD results in a endless reboot cycle. In order to > reboot FreeBSD, I have to cold-boot. The endless reboot cycle appears > to be triggered when the kernel attempts to talk to "uhub", at which > point it reboots, and the cycle repeats. No kernel panics, no crash > cores. > > The issue is not a biggie, other than the time it takes for me to > power down completely, wait for capacitors to discharge completely, > and then cold boot the machine. However, I thought I'd bring it to the > notice of list. > Thank you for the report. Could you please open a PR about this? Glen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: 11.1-BETA3 uhub probes on warm boot triggers endless reboot cycle
On 30 June 2017 at 10:27, Glen Barber wrote: > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:23:26AM +1200, Jonathan Chen wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've got a dual boot system at home, booting into Windows 10 for >> games. I've noticed that since I updated to 11.1-BETA3, a reboot from >> Windows into FreeBSD results in a endless reboot cycle. In order to >> reboot FreeBSD, I have to cold-boot. The endless reboot cycle appears >> to be triggered when the kernel attempts to talk to "uhub", at which >> point it reboots, and the cycle repeats. No kernel panics, no crash >> cores. >> >> The issue is not a biggie, other than the time it takes for me to >> power down completely, wait for capacitors to discharge completely, >> and then cold boot the machine. However, I thought I'd bring it to the >> notice of list. >> > > Thank you for the report. Could you please open a PR about this? https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220370 Cheers. -- Jonathan Chen ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 11.1-BETA3 uhub probes on warm boot triggers endless reboot cycle
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:32:23AM +1200, Jonathan Chen wrote: > On 30 June 2017 at 10:27, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 10:23:26AM +1200, Jonathan Chen wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I've got a dual boot system at home, booting into Windows 10 for > >> games. I've noticed that since I updated to 11.1-BETA3, a reboot from > >> Windows into FreeBSD results in a endless reboot cycle. In order to > >> reboot FreeBSD, I have to cold-boot. The endless reboot cycle appears > >> to be triggered when the kernel attempts to talk to "uhub", at which > >> point it reboots, and the cycle repeats. No kernel panics, no crash > >> cores. > >> > >> The issue is not a biggie, other than the time it takes for me to > >> power down completely, wait for capacitors to discharge completely, > >> and then cold boot the machine. However, I thought I'd bring it to the > >> notice of list. > >> > > > > Thank you for the report. Could you please open a PR about this? > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220370 > Thank you. Glen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: lang/gcc* package builds vs. release/11.0.1/ and the future release/11.1.0 because of vm_ooffset_t and vm_pindex_t changes and how the lang/gcc* work
Am 29. Juni 2017 18:55:59 GMT+08:00 schrieb Mark Millard : >I'm not currently set up to run more than head on >any of amd64, powerpc64, powerpc, aarch64, or armv6/7 >(which are all I target). And I'm in the middle of >attempting a fairly large jump to head -r320458 on >those. Oh, then I had misunderstood your previous mail. No worries, I'll gently proceed then. I expect to update gcc5 in the next 24 hours. >[In my normal/head environment I'm switching to lang/gcc7-devel >for gcc (from lang/gcc6 ) but I'm odd that way.] The compiler should be fine, it's a number of ports that are not (even blocking the move from GCC 5 to 6 as default). Gerald ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"