Following FreeBSD 13 and RaspberryPi/aarch64
Now that FreeBSD-13 is branched, is there a way of "following" that branch on a Pi by upgrading from binaries instead of buildworld/buildkernel? I know that freebsd-update exists, but that can't be used AFAIK. -- chs ___ 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: Clang as default compiler
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote: For most of the failures, we are already aware of them, as a result of our periodic runs. So, just filing a PR to say broken on clang doesn't really help us all that much. I disagree. Just a tiny bit ;-) If the PR says that USE_GCC=4.2 works as a workaround, it helps. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: PF Configuration - FreeBSD Release 9.0 x64
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Shiv. Nath prabh...@digital-infotech.net wrote: Dear FreeBSD Guys, It is FreeBSD Release 9.0 x64 and i see this log very frequent almost every second, And i want to block this IP from reaching my server. i configured the PF as following but still see the same logs, it is like it did not work. block in log quick from 41.211.2.239/32 to any try block log quick ... instead. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Weird message in dmesg
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no wrote: OriS site.free...@orientalsensation.com writes: Dag-Erling Smørgrav d...@des.no writes: On an amd64 system, you should just set it to 0. Well, maybe it'd be a good idea to set it to 0 on amd64 systems for amd64-RELEASE's. Already done. Mine is 33554432 without any modifications to loader.conf on 9.1-RC1. Is that the default? -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installworld and /usr/include/*.h modification times
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Kimmo Paasiala kpaas...@gmail.com wrote: Hello list, Why are /usr/include files installed with install -C during make installworld when almost everything else is installed without the -C flag? This makes it harder to track which files were actually installed during the last make installworld. One can easily find obsolete files (that are not covered with make delete-old(-libs)) with find -x / -type f -mtime +suitable_time but this doesn't work for /usr/include files because the modification times are not bumped on make installworld. If you want, you can do this /after/ a buildworld # mv /usr/include /usr/include.old # cd /usr/src # make hierarchy # make installincludes -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Installworld and /usr/include/*.h modification times
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: You don't need to do those last 2 steps below if you mv /usr/include right before you do 'make installworld', FYI. You are completely right. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: cvsup{, d} woes after upgrading to RELENG_9 on amd64 this weekend
On 4/6/2012 10:53 AM, Trond Endrestøl wrote: Hi, After upgrading to RELENG_9 as of yesterday on my amd64 system, cvsup bombs out with Bus error: 10. Why use cvsup, when you've got csup? :-) -- chs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
jails on 9-STABLE broken?
Is it still broken? I get jail: unknown parameter: allow.nomount when starting a newly created jail. It was supposed to be fixed, but something might reintroduced it? ref. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=165515 -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
make release and TARGET=powerpc
Cross-building went fine (buildworld, buildkernel), but making the USB-image seems to not work (At least on my system) make release TARGET=powerpc TARGET_ARCH=powerpc64 __MAKE_CONF=/dev/null SRCCONF=/dev/null NOPORTS=1 NOSRC=1 ... sh /usr/src/release/powerpc/make-memstick.sh /usr/obj/usr/src/release/release /usr/obj/usr/src/release/memstick Calculated size of `/usr/obj/usr/src/release/memstick.36155': 494223360 bytes, 12459 inodes Extent size set to 8192 /usr/obj/usr/src/release/memstick.36155: 471.3MB (965280 sectors) block size 8192, fragment size 1024 using 9 cylinder groups of 54.09MB, 6924 blks, 1472 inodes. super-block backups (for fsck -b #) at: 32, 110816, 221600, 332384, 443168, 553952, 664736, 775520, 886304, Populating `/usr/obj/usr/src/release/memstick.36155' Image `/usr/obj/usr/src/release/memstick.36155' complete 49992+0 records in 49992+0 records out 511918080 bytes transferred in 3.916377 secs (130712153 bytes/sec) gpart: scheme 'APM': Invalid argument gpart: No such geom: md1. gpart: No such geom: md1. gpart: No such geom: md1. dd: /dev/md1s3: Operation not supported copying filesystem into image file failed *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/release. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/release. The same thing also happens if TARGET = TARGET_ARCH. But sparc64 as TARGET worked fine. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
ZFS / zpool size
Hi! I have a zpool called data, and I have some inconsistencies with sizes. $ zpool iostat capacity operationsbandwidth poolalloc free read write read write -- - - - - - - data3.32T 761G516 50 56.1M 1.13M $ zfs list -t all NAMEUSED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT data 2.21T 463G 9.06G /data Can anyone throw any light on this? Is not free the same as AVAIL? I do not have any zfs snapshots, but some filesystems are compressed. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS / zpool size
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com wrote: snip Ups, I forgot to say that this is on FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE and all filesystems are v28. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS / zpool size
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Shawn Webb latt...@gmail.com wrote: The `zpool` command does not show all the overhead from ZFS. The `zfs` command does. That's why the `zfs` command shows less available space than the `zpool` command. A overhead of almost 300GB? That seems a bit to much, don't you think? The pool consist of one vdev with two 1,5TB disks and one 3TB in raidz1. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS / zpool size
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Tom Evans tevans...@googlemail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com wrote: A overhead of almost 300GB? That seems a bit to much, don't you think? The pool consist of one vdev with two 1,5TB disks and one 3TB in raidz1. Confused about your disks - can you show the output of zpool status. Sure! $ zpool status pool: data state: ONLINE scan: scrub repaired 0 in 9h11m with 0 errors on Tue Jan 17 18:11:26 2012 config: NAMESTATE READ WRITE CKSUM dataONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada1ONLINE 0 0 0 ada2ONLINE 0 0 0 ada3ONLINE 0 0 0 logs gpt/slog ONLINE 0 0 0 cache da0 ONLINE 0 0 0 $ dmesg | grep ada ada0 at ahcich0 bus 0 scbus0 target 0 lun 0 ada0: Crucial CT32GBFAB0 MER1.01k ATA-6 SATA 2.x device ada0: 300.000MB/s transfers (SATA 2.x, UDMA6, PIO 512bytes) ada0: Command Queueing enabled ada0: 31472MB (64454656 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada0: Previously was known as ad4 ada1 at ahcich1 bus 0 scbus1 target 0 lun 0 ada1: WDC WD15EARS-00MVWB0 51.0AB51 ATA-8 SATA 2.x device ada1: 300.000MB/s transfers (SATA 2.x, UDMA6, PIO 8192bytes) ada1: Command Queueing enabled ada1: 1430799MB (2930277168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada1: Previously was known as ad6 ada2 at ahcich2 bus 0 scbus2 target 0 lun 0 ada2: ST3000DM001-9YN166 CC98 ATA-8 SATA 3.x device ada2: 300.000MB/s transfers (SATA 2.x, UDMA6, PIO 8192bytes) ada2: Command Queueing enabled ada2: 2861588MB (5860533168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada2: Previously was known as ad8 ada3 at ahcich3 bus 0 scbus3 target 0 lun 0 ada3: WDC WD15EARS-00MVWB0 51.0AB51 ATA-8 SATA 2.x device ada3: 300.000MB/s transfers (SATA 2.x, UDMA6, PIO 8192bytes) ada3: Command Queueing enabled ada3: 1430799MB (2930277168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada3: Previously was known as ad10 If you have a raidz of N disks with a minimum size of Y GB, you can expect ``zpool list'' to show a size of N*Y and ``zfs list'' to show a size of roughly (N-1)*Y. Ah, that explains it. $ zpool list NAME SIZE ALLOC FREECAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT data 4.06T 3.33T 748G82% 1.00x ONLINE - what zpool iostat show is how much of the disks are set to ZFS. So, on my box with 2 x 6 x 1.5 TB drives in raidz, I see a zpool size of 16.3 TB, and a zfs size of 13.3 TB. Yeap. I can see clearly now, thanks! -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Alexander Yerenkow yeren...@gmail.com wrote: FreeBSD currently have very obscure, closed community. To get in touch, you need to subscribe to several mail lists, constantly read them, I've just found recently (my shame of course) in mail list that there is service ( pub.allbsd.org) which constantly building current versions. This is great, but at homepage of freebsd.org there is no word about it :) That's because it's not official. Do you take the risk? Would a multi-milion-dollar company do that? For your private server, sure it's probably fine. But how do you know that those files are not contaminated? (That being said, the purpose of that service is good. And the files there a most probably 100% fine. But if it's not official... then..) -- chs, if there is only one candiate, there is one one choice! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: As long as I have reliable checksums that match the what the upstream source says is the real thing, it doesn't practically matter where I get my images from. Checksums compared to what? How would you know what the correct checksums for OpenBSD-current is, if it's not built by Theo? -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote: Release engineering for FreeBSD produces SHA256 checksums for all official releases. AFAIK though they're only in the announcement emails and not stored anywhere else. I can't speak for OpenBSD's release process. Thanks, So why do you want to download from a non-official site then? What do you gain with that? -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: svn commit: r227420 - stable/9/sys/vm
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:27 PM, George Kontostanos gkontos.m...@gmail.com wrote: Just out of curiosity or confusion maybe.. Will those commits be included to FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE ? Almost certain of it, since releng/9.0-branch yet has to be created. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Building your own FreeBSD USB memstick image
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote: Is the procedure for creating new FreeBSD memstick images documented anywhere? I'm not sure if its documented but this is how I do it: (edit /etc/make.conf and /etc/src.conf if necessary) make buildworld make buildkernel Insert usb stick fdisk -BI /dev/da0 bsdlabel -B -w da0s1 newfs -U /dev/da0s1a mount /dev/ad0s1a /mnt make installworld installkernel distribution DESTDIR=/mnt Edit /mnt/etc/fstab /dev/da0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 Edit /mnt/etc/rc.conf for your needs unmount /mnt :-) -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: ZFS - abysmal performance with samba since upgrade to 8.2-RELEASE
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote: # Set TXG write limit to a lower threshold. This helps level out # the throughput rate (see zpool iostat). A value of 256MB works well # for systems with 4GB of RAM, while 1GB works well for us w/ 8GB on # disks which have 64MB cache. vfs.zfs.txg.write_limit_override=1073741824 Sorry if you have said this before, but could you elaborate a bit about this number? For instance, how much does the cache on the disk has to say. In my case: 3x1.5TB raidz with WD15EADS-00R6B0 which has 32MB cache and 12GB memory. What would you recommend and why. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: make world fails in usr.sbin/config?
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Matthew Seaman m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 25/05/2010 11:40:23, Stefan Bethke wrote: For the record: I'm now running -stable as of last night, compiled without issue on ZFS filesystems throughout. No idea what caused the issue in the first place, and what made it disappear though, but updating to the correctly built -stable made the build on ZFS work again. (It also involved an accidential upgrade and downgrade via -current, since I checked out the wrong tag with csup. Yikes.) I've a new machine that's been running 8-STABLE on ZFS for about a week now. Had no problems installing and then upgrading to recent 8-STABLE although I did start with installing an 8-STABLE snapshot rather than 8.0-RELEASE. (See: http://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/Mirror) Verb. Sap. If you're booting from ZFS, beware of updating the zpool version without due care and attention. 8.0-RELEASE was on version 13, 8-STABLE is now on version 14. (Use 'zpool update' to see what the status is on your machine -- this just gives you a report, and doesn't update anything.) Updating the zpool version is pretty smooth and simple, but *remember to immediately rebuild and reinstall gptzfsboot or zfsboot bootcode on your drives*. If you don't do that, your system won't be able to find the pool with the root filesystem and so won't be able to reboot. Old thread, I know. But I encountered this error today and my solution was that /tmp was tmpfs and it was full. Cleaning that up fixed the error. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com wrote: Will try to reboot server now to se if that has any impact. It seems to have solved it. At least temporary. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote: You can easily test it - use the stick as a simple disk device with UFS and see how much CPU does it take simply to talk to the device. See, that is why I think it is a ZFS issue. Because I did that. I created a UFS filesystem on the same usb stick. Mounted it and did a dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/file. The systemload goes +0.6 instead if +10.3. See: CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.6% system, 0.0% interrupt, 99.3% idle Mem: 832M Active, 960M Inact, 7017M Wired, 2600K Cache, 1237M Buf, 3063M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 8192M Free PID USERNAMETHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 38261 root 1 460 5776K 1112K wdrain 7 0:07 4.98% dd But when using it as cache device for zfs: CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 11.9% system, 0.0% interrupt, 88.1% idle Mem: 832M Active, 193M Inact, 5782M Wired, 2592K Cache, 1237M Buf, 5066M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 8192M Free The funny thing is that when I add the device (and some cache is added to it) the load is normal. But the load goes up when nothing is written to it (or beeing read from it) -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net wrote: How do you measure that nothing is read or written to it? I used zpool iostat -v Please check with gstat -f '^DEVICE$' if there are really no reads/writes to the device (please replace DEVICE with the name of your USB device, e.g. da0). If you see writes, I would say - this is the reason for the load - your cache is on the way to be filled with useful data I see almost no writes (nor reads) If gstat shows zero activity, I suggest to run 'top -S' and look at the process(es) which consume about 10% CPU (do not take care about the idle process). Based upon this we can maybe suggest further things to investigate. Heres the output of that: CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 11.8% system, 0.0% interrupt, 88.1% idle Mem: 841M Active, 193M Inact, 5086M Wired, 4876K Cache, 1237M Buf, 5750M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 8192M Free PID USERNAMETHR PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 11 root 8 171 ki31 0K 128K CPU00??? 713.62% idle 5 root 5 -8- 0K76K zvol:i 5 401.9H 91.16% zfskern Thanks for your time on looking into this :-) -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Ollivier Robert
robe...@keltia.freenix.fr wrote:
According to Christer Solskogen:
See, that is why I think it is a ZFS issue. Because I did that.
I created a UFS filesystem on the same usb stick. Mounted it and did a
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/file.
The systemload goes +0.6 instead if +10.3.
Do not forget that everything that is read/written from/to USB devices goes
through the CPU (no DMA or anything for USB devices).
I didn't forget that. Thats why I also tested with UFS. And I do not
have the same issue with that.
With top -HS I discovered this:
5 root-8- 0K76K zio-i 4 403.2H 85.06%
{l2arc_feed_threa}
--
chs,
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net wrote: Quoting Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com (from Tue, 16 Nov 2010 14:00:48 +0100): On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Alexander Leidinger alexan...@leidinger.net wrote: How do you measure that nothing is read or written to it? I used zpool iostat -v zpool iostat (without -v) does not show cache filling writes to the cache device. I do not know about -v, but I would not be surprised if it does not show this too. Ah, but it does. capacity operationsbandwidth pool used avail read write read write -- - - - - - - data2.11T 1.96T 0 0 0 0 raidz12.11T 1.96T 0 0 0 0 ada1- - 0 0 0 0 ada2- - 0 0 0 0 ada3- - 0 0 0 0 cache - - - - - - da0 2.64G 4.89G 0 0 0 0 -- - - - - - - Please check with gstat -f '^DEVICE$' if there are really no reads/writes to the device (please replace DEVICE with the name of your USB device, e.g. da0). If you see writes, I would say - this is the reason for the load - your cache is on the way to be filled with useful data I see almost no writes (nor reads) I'm not sure: you verified the output of zpool iostat -v with gstat or not? If not, please do. Yeah, gstat shows (almost) the same as zpool iostat -v. (gstat have a higher refresh rate than iostat) Based upon you other answer (with -H), I would still think the L2arc (cache) device is being filled in the background (which means there should be something visible with gstat). gstat shows that something is going on when I add the cache device(about one minute in my case). But the systemload is +0.01%. But when it's settled the system load goes up. top -HS says that the command called: l2arc_feed_threa goes up when nothing is happening to the cache. (according to zpool iostat -v and gstat) -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote: sysctl -a | grep vfs.zfs.arc sysctl -a | grep vm.kmem sysctl kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats $ sysctl -a | grep vfs.zfs.arc vfs.zfs.arc_meta_limit: 1342177280 vfs.zfs.arc_meta_used: 1319657696 vfs.zfs.arc_min: 671088640 vfs.zfs.arc_max: 5368709120 $ sysctl -a | grep vm.kmem vm.kmem_size_scale: 3 vm.kmem_size_max: 329853485875 vm.kmem_size_min: 0 vm.kmem_size: 17179869184 $ sysctl kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hits: 1222580509 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.misses: 68466812 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.demand_data_hits: 484092448 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.demand_data_misses: 4205673 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.demand_metadata_hits: 491631116 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.demand_metadata_misses: 19606091 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.prefetch_data_hits: 24766020 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.prefetch_data_misses: 37797493 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.prefetch_metadata_hits: 222090925 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.prefetch_metadata_misses: 6857555 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.mru_hits: 69264838 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.mru_ghost_hits: 11925502 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.mfu_hits: 974464567 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.mfu_ghost_hits: 12990137 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.allocated: 103515682 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.deleted: 48289237 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.stolen: 28519978 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.recycle_miss: 6634926 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.mutex_miss: 80863 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.evict_skip: 59151426 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.evict_l2_cached: 1196327357952 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.evict_l2_eligible: 2965132368896 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.evict_l2_ineligible: 1384672357376 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hash_elements: 281528 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hash_elements_max: 482648 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hash_collisions: 33649608 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hash_chains: 76224 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hash_chain_max: 12 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.p: 3661654753 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.c: 5296620032 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.c_min: 671088640 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.c_max: 5368709120 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.size: 5296227856 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.hdr_size: 67212264 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.data_size: 4485484032 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.other_size: 743532072 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_hits: 13784878 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_misses: 5542 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_feeds: 451293848 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_rw_clash: 471 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_read_bytes: 232047452160 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_bytes: 1000487455744 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_writes_sent: 1419007 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_writes_done: 1419007 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_writes_error: 6 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_writes_hdr_miss: 417 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_evict_lock_retry: 377 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_evict_reading: 91 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_free_on_write: 896559 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_abort_lowmem: 75001 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_cksum_bad: 4 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_io_error: 5 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_size: 2325617664 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_hdr_size: 0 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.memory_throttle_count: 2493 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_trylock_fail: 148110262 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_passed_headroom: 6266060163 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_spa_mismatch: 0 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_in_l2: 11644519641883 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_io_in_progress: 1099778 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_not_cacheable: 643516792351 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_full: 86844 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_buffer_iter: 451293848 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_pios: 1419007 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_buffer_bytes_scanned: 189074461394960896 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_buffer_list_iter: 28880609174 kstat.zfs.misc.arcstats.l2_write_buffer_list_null_iter: 1367002655 Hope this helps! -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Jeremy Chadwick free...@jdc.parodius.com wrote: Since you're running 8.1-RELEASE, can you please test this issue on RELENG_8 (8.1-STABLE) and see if it exists there? Sure, I could do that. 8.2-RELEASE isn't that far away, is it? But I think that Alexander should get the necessary info first (since he is the ZFS expert ;-) I also have another machine which I can installed it to. I just have to verify if that machine also have the same problem. It might be the usb stick (but I doubt that), it might be something with cache device on usb when using raidz, it might be anything else. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com wrote: snip Yesterday I installed 8.1-RELEASE on another machine, made a zpool and added the same usb device as cache. That machine does not have same issue as my other machine. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Christer Solskogen christer.solsko...@gmail.com wrote: snip Yesterday I installed 8.1-RELEASE on another machine, made a zpool and added the same usb device as cache. That machine does not have same issue as my other machine. I also tried adding a SSD as a cache device to the machine that gets the high load. Same symptoms as if I added a USB stick. Will try to reboot server now to se if that has any impact. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
My load on my i7 920 is certainly higher when I add a 8GB usb stick as a ZFS cache device. It seems to use about 10% system load - If I remove the cache device it drops about 10%. Anyone else seeing this? With cache device: CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 10.3% system, 0.0% interrupt, 91.5% idle Mem: 822M Active, 9101M Inact, 1542M Wired, 34M Cache, 1237M Buf, 375M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 200K Used, 8192M Free Without: up 56+01:04:25 21:50:01 137 processes: 1 running, 136 sleeping CPU: 0.1% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 99.9% idle Mem: 822M Active, 9101M Inact, 1542M Wired, 34M Cache, 1237M Buf, 375M Free The load reported by top is +0.50 with, and +0.00 without. FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE amd64 -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High cpu usage when using ZFS cache device
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Brian Reichert reich...@numachi.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:50:50PM +0100, Christer Solskogen wrote: My load on my i7 920 is certainly higher when I add a 8GB usb stick as a ZFS cache device. USB 1.0? 2.0? Dunno even if that would make a difference... This is USB 2.0. I didn't know USB had such much to say on the cpu. -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
NFS and mount_nullfs, kernel panic?
I have a machine which works as a prison for a couple of jails. That particular machine has its /usr/ports, /usr/ports/distfiles, and /usr/ports/packages mounted via NFS from another FreeBSD machine. The machine that crases also nullmounts those filesystems into each jail. I'm not completly sure that this is the reason the machine crashes, but i suspect that is the reason. What can I do to figure it how? What kind of debugging knobs do I need to apply to learn more about the problem? -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: hardware for home use large storage
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Miroslav Lachman 000.f...@quip.cz wrote: System is booted from 2GB internal USB flash Be aware that not all USB sticks work as a root device on 8.0-RELEASE. I've tried a couple of different sticks that is probed *after* the kernel tries to mount /. It seems to be a problem that emerged with 8.0, as 7.x worked like a charm on the same USB stick. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=138798 -- chs, ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: make buildkernel failing on zfs
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Colin free...@southportcomputers.co.uk wrote: Anyone got any pointers? Could you post your /etc/make.conf? That said, I recon you build your kernel in a rather wierd way. Delete /usr/obj/* and run make cleandir make cleandir in /usr/src. Then build your world and kernel like this make buildworld buildkernel KERNCONF=TED. If that goes as well, run make installkernel KERNCONF=TED, reboot, make installworld, run mergemaster and reboot again. -- chs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: HEADS UP: Mass mergemaster MFC to [78]-stable
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Doug Barton do...@freebsd.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Howdy, Great work, Doug! Thanks. -- chs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
buildworld fails after patch (FreeBSD-SA-06:23.openssl)
FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p3 amd64 /usr/bin/gcc -O1 -pipe -march=nocona -DTERMIOS -DANSI_SOURCE -I/usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl -I/usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto -I/files3/build/obj/usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto -DOPENSSL_THREADS -DOPENSSL_NO_IDEA -DNO_IDEA -c /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:81: error: `DH_R_MODULUS_TOO_LARGE' undeclared here (not in a function) /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:81: error: initializer element is not constant /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:81: error: (near initialization for `DH_str_reasons[1].error') /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:81: error: initializer element is not constant /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:81: error: (near initialization for `DH_str_reasons[1]') /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:82: error: initializer element is not constant /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:82: error: (near initialization for `DH_str_reasons[2]') /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:83: error: initializer element is not constant /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err.c:83: error: (near initialization for `DH_str_reasons[3]') *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/src. The patch was applied using cvsup. -- cso ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: buildworld fails after patch (FreeBSD-SA-06:23.openssl)
On Fri, September 29, 2006 10:09, Colin Percival wrote: Christer Solskogen wrote: /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err. c /usr/src/secure/lib/libcrypto/../../../crypto/openssl/crypto/dh/dh_err. c:81: error: `DH_R_MODULUS_TOO_LARGE' undeclared here (not in a function) Looks like you don't have an updated dh.h yet. Try running cvsup again, maybe from a different mirror. Colin Percival I've tried norway's mirror (my default), the danish, the swedish mirror and the mirror in holland. No change. Just to be sure I also deletet src/crypto before I tried the different mirrors. -- cso ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: buildworld fails after patch (FreeBSD-SA-06:23.openssl)
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 05:30:05 -0700 Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christer Solskogen wrote: I've tried norway's mirror (my default), the danish, the swedish mirror and the mirror in holland. No change. Just to be sure I also deletet src/crypto before I tried the different mirrors. Exactly what command did you run to try to compile this? Do you mean using different mirrors? I'm using a supfile for that. But if you mean building I used 'make buildkernel buildworld' But doing a make includes did the trick. It compiles as it should now. -- chs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: buildworld fails after patch (FreeBSD-SA-06:23.openssl)
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 08:27:55 -0700 security [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christer Solskogen wrote: On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 05:30:05 -0700 Colin Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you mean using different mirrors? I'm using a supfile for that. But if you mean building I used 'make buildkernel buildworld' But doing a make includes did the trick. It compiles as it should now. I though the order was always buildworld before buildkernel You can choose what order you want. It will work either way. For the record; a word of a patch for the patch was just in. -- chs ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(no subject)
Hi!
I got myself a mainboard with the ICH7 chipset. This chipset is supported
in FreeBSD, but on my board it had a problem. It found only 2 of my four
disks (ad0 and ad2) I tried updating to 6.0-stable (from 6.0-release) but
the problem resist.
I found a patch at bsdforums that did indeed work.
Could anyone review this, and commit it, please?
Taken from http://www.bsdforums.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=37304
--- ata-chipset.c Thu Oct 13 10:07:46 2005
+++ ata-chipset-ich7.c Sun Dec 11 23:25:48 2005
@@ -1845,10 +1845,13 @@
struct ata_channel *ch = device_get_softc(dev);
int mask, timeout;
-/* ICH6 has 4 SATA ports as master/slave on 2 channels so deal with
pairs */
+/* ICH6/7 has 4 SATA ports as master/slave on 2 channels so deal with
pairs */
if (ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801FB_S1 ||
ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801FB_R1 ||
- ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801FB_M) {
+ ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801FB_M ||
+ ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801GB_S1 ||
+ ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801GB_R1 ||
+ ctlr-chip-chipid == ATA_I82801GB_M) {
mask = (0x0005 ch-unit);
}
else {
--
cso
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
