Re: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Don Lewis]

On 27 Jan, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> On 1/27/2018 3:23 AM, Don Lewis wrote:
>> 
>> I just ran into this for this first time with samba46.  I kicked of a
>> ports build this evening before leaving for several hours.  When I
>> returned, samba46 had failed with a build runaway.  I just tried again
>> and I see python stuck in the usem state.  This is what I see with
>> procstat -k:
> 
> Hmmm, is this indicative of a processor bug or a FreeBSD bug or its
> indeterminate at this point ?

My suspicion is a FreeBSD bug, probably a locking / race issue.  I know
that we've had to make some tweeks to our code for AMD CPUs, like this:


r321608 | kib | 2017-07-27 01:37:07 -0700 (Thu, 27 Jul 2017) | 9 lines

Use MFENCE to serialize RDTSC on non-Intel CPUs.

Kernel already used the stronger barrier instruction for AMDs, correct
the userspace fast gettimeofday() implementation as well.



I did go back and look at the build runaways that I've occasionally seen
on my AMD FX-8320E package builder.  I haven't seen the python issue
there, but have seen gmake get stuck in a sleeping state with a bunch of
zombie offspring.

___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Don Lewis]

On 27 Jan, Peter Moody wrote:
> Whelp, I replaced the r5 1600x with an r7 1700 (au 1734) and I'm now
> getting minutes of uptime before I hard crash. With smt, without, with c
> states, without, with opcache, without. No difference.

Check the temperatures.  Maybe the heat sink isn't making good contact
after the CPU replacement.

___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Don Lewis]

On 28 Jan, Pete French wrote:
> 
> 
> On 28/01/2018 20:28, Don Lewis wrote:
>> I'd be wary of the B350 boards with the higher TDP eight core Ryzen CPUs
>> since the VRMs on the cheaper boards tend to have less robust VRM
>> designs.
> 
> Gah! Yes, I forgot that.originally sec'd the board for a smaller Ryzen, 
> then though "what the hell" and got the 1700 without going back and 
> checking that kind of stuff. Hmm, shall swap for a different one if I 
> can. Thanks for poining that out.

I started off with a Gigabyte AB350 Gaming for my 1700X back when there
was enough ambiguity about ECC support to give me hope that it would
work.  Everything seemed to work other than ECC and the problems caused
by my buggy CPU and the shared page issue, but the VRM temps in the BIOS
were really high (and I had no way to monitor that under load).  When I
upgraded to get working ECC, I also looked at reviews about VRM quality.

___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Pete French]

On 28/01/2018 20:28, Don Lewis wrote:

I'd be wary of the B350 boards with the higher TDP eight core Ryzen CPUs
since the VRMs on the cheaper boards tend to have less robust VRM
designs.


Gah! Yes, I forgot that.originally sec'd the board for a smaller Ryzen, 
then though "what the hell" and got the 1700 without going back and 
checking that kind of stuff. Hmm, shall swap for a different one if I 
can. Thanks for poining that out.


-pete. [kicking himself...]

___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Peter Moody]

> Gigabyte AX370 Gaming 5.

all of issues so far have been on a pair of asrock ab350's. But I've
got an msi x370 coming early next week.
___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Don Lewis]

On 28 Jan, Pete French wrote:
>>> I'm about ready to have a party.  My Ryzen 5 1600 has been up for over 8
>>> days so far after changing the memory to a slower speed.  System load
>>> hovers around .3
>>
>> I couldn't find an easy way to down-speed my memory in the bios :(
> 
> Out of interest, what motherboards are people using ? I still havent
> built my test system, desite being the OP in the thread, but I have
> an MSI B350 Tomahawk as the test board.

Gigabyte AX370 Gaming 5.

I'd be wary of the B350 boards with the higher TDP eight core Ryzen CPUs
since the VRMs on the cheaper boards tend to have less robust VRM
designs.

Personally I won't put together a system without ECC RAM both for
overall reliability and also the fact that the error reporting will
immediately flag (or eliminate) RAM issues when the system is unstable.
That pretty much confined my motherboard choices to the higher end X370
motherboards.  I think only ASRock makes a B350 motherboard with ECC
support.  There's no reason that ECC support couldn't be universal other
than product differentiation so that the motherboard manufacturers can
collect more $$$ from anyone who cares about this feature.

___
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: i386 with 4GB RAM: less than 2GB available on A2SAV (Intel Atom E3940)

[Mike Karels]

> On 28 Jan 2018, at 15:57, Andre Albsmeier  =
> wrote:
> > I have a lot of machines running with 4 GB physical RAM and, for
> > some reasons, I still have to use a 32 bits OS.
> >=20
> > All of them show something between 3 and 3.5 GB of RAM available
> > in dmesg but the brand new Supermicro A2SAV really shocked me:
> >=20
> > FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #0: Mon Jan 15 06:57:10 CET 2018
> > ...
> > real memory  =3D 4294967296 (4096 MB)
> > avail memory =3D 1939558400 (1849 MB)
> > ...
> >=20
> > So do people have any ideas how I might get a bit closer to at least
> > 3 GB? I assume there are no FreeBSD knobs which might help but hope
> > dies last...

> This is a common problem on i386.  Most likely some ranges are reserved
> for I/O mappings, such as video cards.  If you boot with -v, I think the
> kernel prints an overview of the physical ram chunks available?  I don't
> know of any other way to get such an overview.

> Another option is to try PAE, but I have no idea how stable that is...

> -Dimitry

I suspect that the unavailable RAM has been mapped above 4 GB by the BIOS.

About PAE: at $JOB, we have a FreeBSD 8.2 system that has been running
PAE reliably since 8.2 was new.  Also, we ship amd64 systems that run
mostly 32-bit binaries, which works well.

Mike
___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Nimrod Levy]

I have the Asus prime B350-plus

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-B350-PLUS/


On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:50 AM Pete French 
wrote:

> >> I'm about ready to have a party.  My Ryzen 5 1600 has been up for over 8
> >> days so far after changing the memory to a slower speed.  System load
> >> hovers around .3
> >
> > I couldn't find an easy way to down-speed my memory in the bios :(
>
> Out of interest, what motherboards are people using ? I still havent
> built my test system, desite being the OP in the thread, but I have
> an MSI B350 Tomahawk as the test board.
>
> Sadly, I think the length and contnet of this thread has answered one
> of my original questions though, what was whether or not it is safe to
> go ahead and order Epyc boards for the data centre. I am not prepared
> to gamble on that right now when people on the desktop have had so many
> issue.
>
> -pete.
>
> --

--
Nimrod
___
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: Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ?

[Pete French]

>> I'm about ready to have a party.  My Ryzen 5 1600 has been up for over 8
>> days so far after changing the memory to a slower speed.  System load
>> hovers around .3
>
> I couldn't find an easy way to down-speed my memory in the bios :(

Out of interest, what motherboards are people using ? I still havent
built my test system, desite being the OP in the thread, but I have
an MSI B350 Tomahawk as the test board.

Sadly, I think the length and contnet of this thread has answered one
of my original questions though, what was whether or not it is safe to
go ahead and order Epyc boards for the data centre. I am not prepared
to gamble on that right now when people on the desktop have had so many
issue.

-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"

Re: i386 with 4GB RAM: less than 2GB available on A2SAV (Intel Atom E3940)

[Dimitry Andric]

On 28 Jan 2018, at 15:57, Andre Albsmeier  wrote:
> I have a lot of machines running with 4 GB physical RAM and, for
> some reasons, I still have to use a 32 bits OS.
> 
> All of them show something between 3 and 3.5 GB of RAM available
> in dmesg but the brand new Supermicro A2SAV really shocked me:
> 
> FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #0: Mon Jan 15 06:57:10 CET 2018
> ...
> real memory  = 4294967296 (4096 MB)
> avail memory = 1939558400 (1849 MB)
> ...
> 
> So do people have any ideas how I might get a bit closer to at least
> 3 GB? I assume there are no FreeBSD knobs which might help but hope
> dies last...

This is a common problem on i386.  Most likely some ranges are reserved
for I/O mappings, such as video cards.  If you boot with -v, I think the
kernel prints an overview of the physical ram chunks available?  I don't
know of any other way to get such an overview.

Another option is to try PAE, but I have no idea how stable that is...

-Dimitry



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: i386 with 4GB RAM: less than 2GB available on A2SAV (Intel Atom E3940)

[Eugene Grosbein]

28.01.2018 21:57, Andre Albsmeier wrote:

> I have a lot of machines running with 4 GB physical RAM and, for
> some reasons, I still have to use a 32 bits OS.
> 
> All of them show something between 3 and 3.5 GB of RAM available
> in dmesg but the brand new Supermicro A2SAV really shocked me:
> 
> FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #0: Mon Jan 15 06:57:10 CET 2018
> ...
> real memory  = 4294967296 (4096 MB)
> avail memory = 1939558400 (1849 MB)
> ...
> 
> So do people have any ideas how I might get a bit closer to at least
> 3 GB? I assume there are no FreeBSD knobs which might help but hope
> dies last...

First, try to decrease amount of RAM dedicated to integrated video, if any 
(BIOS Setup).

Also, I'd like to know reasons that made you stick to 32 bit OS
as we have pretty good support for 32 bit applications running under 64 bit 
system.

___
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"

i386 with 4GB RAM: less than 2GB available on A2SAV (Intel Atom E3940)

[Andre Albsmeier]

I have a lot of machines running with 4 GB physical RAM and, for
some reasons, I still have to use a 32 bits OS.

All of them show something between 3 and 3.5 GB of RAM available
in dmesg but the brand new Supermicro A2SAV really shocked me:

FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE #0: Mon Jan 15 06:57:10 CET 2018
...
real memory  = 4294967296 (4096 MB)
avail memory = 1939558400 (1849 MB)
...

So do people have any ideas how I might get a bit closer to at least
3 GB? I assume there are no FreeBSD knobs which might help but hope
dies last...
___
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: why does buildworld fail on stable/11 ?

[Scott Bennett]

Ian Lepore  wrote:

> On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 09:52 +, Holger Kipp wrote:
> > Dear Scott,
> > 
> > Am 26.01.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Scott Bennett 
> > >:
> > 
> > cd /usr/src; PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin MAKE_CMD=make 
> > /usr/obj/usr/src/make.amd64/bmake -m /usr/src/share/mk -f Makefile.inc1 
> > TARGET=amd64 TARGET_ARCH=amd64 MK_META_MODE=no cleandir
> > bmake: illegal argument to d option -- p
> > usage: make [-BPSXeiknpqrstv] [-C directory] [-D variable]
> > [-d flags] [-E variable] [-f makefile] [-I directory]
> > [-j max_jobs] [-m directory] [-V variable]
> > [variable=value] [target ...]
> > *** Error code 2
> > 
> > Stop.
> > make: stopped in /usr/src
> > hellas# exit
> > exit
> > 
> > Script done on Fri Jan 26 01:33:18 2018
> > 
> > 
> > ?Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
> > 
> > This sound similar to an issue with make in 2013:
> > 
> > 20130613:
> > Some people report the following error after the switch to bmake:
> > 
> > make: illegal option -- J
> > usage: make [-BPSXeiknpqrstv] [-C directory] [-D variable]
> > ...
> > *** [buildworld] Error code 2
> > 
> > this likely due to an old instance of make in
> > ${MAKEPATH} (${MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX}${.CURDIR}/make.${MACHINE})
> > which src/Makefile will use that blindly, if it exists, so if
> > you see the above error:
> > 
> > rm -rf `make -V MAKEPATH`
> > 
> > should resolve it.
> > 
> > Can you check if you have an older version of make in your makepath and 
> > delete / rename it?
> > 
>
> Yep, it's definitely running a bad old version of make, and the thought
> that it's using /usr/obj/usr/src/make.amd64/bmake even though it's not

 Aack!!  "make buildworld" doesn't kill that??  Wow.  Why does it get
missed by buildworld (or cleanworld, if that's what buildworld uses)?  Should
that get a PR?  That program must have been sitting there for several *years*.
 The irony here is that I have long treated /usr/obj as disposable
(i.e., I don't normally bother to back it up anywhere) because a) a "make
buildworld buildkernel" will recreate all of it, and b) both of those targets
include huge sequences of deletions that wipe out all existing versions of
stuff that they will create.  Or so I have thought until now.  Apparently,
the handbook needs to be updated to reflect the need to

/bin/rm -rf /usr/obj/usr

(or use newfs) before each buildworld just for safety's sake.

> up to date fits the symptoms. ?I'm a bit confused by the "rm -rf"

 Yes, it certainly does.  A quick newfs of the device where I keep
/usr/obj, and it seems to work perfectly now.  I'm almost certain that this
same obsolete binary was what put a sudden halt to my updates of 10.3-STABLE
back in early October 2016, as well.

> command at the end... when I do make -V MAKEPATH I get nothing, so the
> rm command would just be an error -- since that's from UPDATING in
> 2013, I'm thinking it may be out of date advice now.
>
> I think the right fix here is probably "rm -rf /usr/obj/*" followed by
> a make buildworld.
>
 Well, in this case, /usr/obj is a mount point for a UFS2 file system,
so it's less messy and much faster just to newfs it and mount it again.
 Anyway, thanks ever so much to Holger Kipp and Ian Lepore for finding
the problem, and thanks also to everyone else who tried.  The buildworld
(complete with ccache) has completed, and right now a kernel (GENERIC except
for SCHED_4BSD instead of the wretched SCHED_ULE) is busily being built.
Then I will try a much more customized kernel, but I no longer expect any
serious obstacles, thanks entirely to the help I got here on this list.


  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**
* Internet:   bennett at sdf.org   *xor*   bennett at freeshell.org  *
**
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army."   *
*-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 *
**
___
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"