-On [2329 02:15], Brian Fundakowski Feldman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
>Did you try "call setdumpdev(0xf00)" with the proper show disk/ yet?
I tried:
db> show disk/ad0s1b
0xc0b65880
bd> write dumpdev 0xc0b65880
dumpdev:fff
Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
>
> Did you try "call setdumpdev(0xf00)" with the proper show disk/ yet?
> It's probably worth documenting the procedure even if it will be later
> be replaced with a loader functionality... however, we should still
> support the way it is now for people who want
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:33:30 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> Yes it is worth documenting, and I thought that Sheldon was already on
> the right way with his dumpon(8) patches.
As soon as I've seen how you do it and have tried it out successfully
for myself, I'll try again. :-)
T
-On [2329 02:15], Brian Fundakowski Feldman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
>> Your patch is a step in the right direction.
>>
>> I am currently only trying to figure out why the DDB way doesn't trigger
>> savecore to recognise the dump.
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> Your patch is a step in the right direction.
>
> I am currently only trying to figure out why the DDB way doesn't trigger
> savecore to recognise the dump.
Did you try "call setdumpdev(0xf00)" with the proper show disk/ yet?
It's proba
-On [2328 17:40], Bruce Evans ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
>> Given that the moment at which dumpdev is set seems important, I think
>> it's probably better for me to back these isntructions out of the
>> dumpon(8) manual page and wait for something l
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> Given that the moment at which dumpdev is set seems important, I think
> it's probably better for me to back these isntructions out of the
> dumpon(8) manual page and wait for something less tricky.
>
> Do you agree?
Yes.
The man page is also mislead
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 22:51:54 +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> I think savecore will find the dump provided dumplo is consistently
> initialized, so the only problem with starting dumps at the start of
> the device is that this will clobber the label if the device contains
> the label.
Given that th
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Gary Jennejohn wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven writes:
> >I am currently only trying to figure out why the DDB way doesn't trigger
> >savecore to recognise the dump.
> >
>
> Maybe because kern.dumpdev has a different value and savecore can't
> find a dump on it ? Have
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven writes:
>I am currently only trying to figure out why the DDB way doesn't trigger
>savecore to recognise the dump.
>
Maybe because kern.dumpdev has a different value and savecore can't
find a dump on it ? Have you tried setting kern.dumpdev by hand and
then manually
-On [2328 13:15], Sheldon Hearn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>
>On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 13:02:06 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
>> I can then dump when typing:
>>
>> db> panic
>
>Damnit. So I've just committed bogus advice in dumpon(8). :-(
No not really.
Your patch is a step in
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 13:02:06 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> I can then dump when typing:
>
> db> panic
Damnit. So I've just committed bogus advice in dumpon(8). :-(
Ciao,
Sheldon.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body
-On [2328 12:55], Sheldon Hearn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:50:12 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
>> I wasn't complaining, on the contrary!
>>
>> I was happily surprised it was way faster than the SCSI dump. =)
>
>So now the only question is whether our ex
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:50:12 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
> I wasn't complaining, on the contrary!
>
> I was happily surprised it was way faster than the SCSI dump. =)
So now the only question is whether our existing bootstrapping
infrastructure already has some way to use your
-On [2327 14:40], Soren Schmidt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>It seems Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>>
>> the DDB trick works. And it dumps at PIO mode 4, woot!
>>
>You have to, there is no garantie that DMA and even less interrupts
>is working proberly on a potentially hosed machine.
It seems Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
>
> the DDB trick works. And it dumps at PIO mode 4, woot!
>
You have to, there is no garantie that DMA and even less interrupts
is working proberly on a potentially hosed machine..
-Søren
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "uns
-On [2327 06:15], Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>-On [2327 00:00], Brian Fundakowski Feldman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
>>
>>Just do a "w dumpdev 0xc0b65800". You do need the 0x prefix, something
>>I tried to hint at
-On [2327 00:00], Brian Fundakowski Feldman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
>
>> dumpdev=c0b65800 or w dumpdev=c0b65800 or whatever combination will
>> either result in `nothing written' or `symbol not found'.
>
>Just do a "w dumpdev 0xc0b65800".
On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
> Ok,
>
> so thanks to Brian I can at least get a good value for my swap slice by
> using show disk/ad0s1b.
>
> It returns that the dev_t is 0xc0b65800
>
> Ok, so I then proceed to look at dumpdev
>
> A p dumpdev shows me that it is set to a
Ok,
so thanks to Brian I can at least get a good value for my swap slice by
using show disk/ad0s1b.
It returns that the dev_t is 0xc0b65800
Ok, so I then proceed to look at dumpdev
A p dumpdev shows me that it is set to a weird value not matching my
dev_t above.
A p *dumpdev returns
20 matches
Mail list logo
