On 07/09/2016 22:04, Paul Goyette wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2016, Roy Marples wrote:
>
>> On 07/09/2016 09:48, Roy Marples wrote:
>>> On 06/09/2016 08:39, Paul Goyette wrote:
I'm in the process of installing a new machine, and I'm getting a
reproducible panic at boot time.
The mac
On 2016-09-07 22:04, Paul Goyette wrote:
Are you able to test the possible fix that was proposed?
Not until Friday at the earliest as I'm away on business now.
Roy
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016, Roy Marples wrote:
On 07/09/2016 09:48, Roy Marples wrote:
On 06/09/2016 08:39, Paul Goyette wrote:
I'm in the process of installing a new machine, and I'm getting a
reproducible panic at boot time.
The machine is a Intel Core i7-6900 (8 cores, 16 threads, 3.2GHz) on an
AS
On 07/09/2016 09:48, Roy Marples wrote:
> On 06/09/2016 08:39, Paul Goyette wrote:
>> I'm in the process of installing a new machine, and I'm getting a
>> reproducible panic at boot time.
>>
>> The machine is a Intel Core i7-6900 (8 cores, 16 threads, 3.2GHz) on an
>> ASUS X99-E motherboard. It is
On 06/09/2016 08:39, Paul Goyette wrote:
> I'm in the process of installing a new machine, and I'm getting a
> reproducible panic at boot time.
>
> The machine is a Intel Core i7-6900 (8 cores, 16 threads, 3.2GHz) on an
> ASUS X99-E motherboard. It is fully-populated with 8 x 16GB DDR4 DIMMs
> (f
p...@whooppee.com (Paul Goyette) writes:
>In any case, if the bp->b_flags access needs to be protected by the
>mutex, a cursory grep shows that there are some other places that might
>need similar treatment, in wapbl_do_io(), wapbl_resize_buf(), and
>wapbl_write_blocks().
Not b_flags, just the
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016, Michael van Elst wrote:
p...@whooppee.com (Paul Goyette) writes:
Basically, I cloned the hard drive of my other machine using dd, and
then put the copy in the new machine, and booted. It comes up fine in
single-user mode. However, shortly after typing ^D to the single-use
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016, Michael van Elst wrote:
p...@whooppee.com (Paul Goyette) writes:
Basically, I cloned the hard drive of my other machine using dd, and
then put the copy in the new machine, and booted. It comes up fine in
single-user mode. However, shortly after typing ^D to the single-use
p...@whooppee.com (Paul Goyette) writes:
>Basically, I cloned the hard drive of my other machine using dd, and
>then put the copy in the new machine, and booted. It comes up fine in
>single-user mode. However, shortly after typing ^D to the single-user
>shell, it fails a KASSERT at sys/kern/v
FWIW, this seems to be something specific to wapbl. I was able to boot
single-user, tunefs the file systems to set the log size to zero, and
edit /etc/fstab (to remove -o log). Once I did this, and wapbl was thus
completely disabled, the system came up just fine.
I know that the amount of me
On 2016/09/06 17:05, Paul Goyette wrote:
Kewl! How is your performance? I was talking with Matt Thomas the other day,
and he suggested that having so much memory might introduce significant
overhead in page management.
Hmm. This machine used to have 32GB memory. When it was
increased, I fel
I doubt if it is really a problem of too much memory.
I'm using a dual processor Xeon E5-2687W machine with 256GB memory,
and single FFS partitions in two SATA drives are in use with WAPBL.
% dmesg
...
NetBSD 7.99.36 (XXX) #0: Fri Aug 26 22:51:41 JST 2016
rin@XXX:XXX
total memo
I'm in the process of installing a new machine, and I'm getting a
reproducible panic at boot time.
The machine is a Intel Core i7-6900 (8 cores, 16 threads, 3.2GHz) on an
ASUS X99-E motherboard. It is fully-populated with 8 x 16GB DDR4 DIMMs
(for a total, yes, of 128GB!).
Basically, I clone
13 matches
Mail list logo
