FW: pciconf -lbvV crashes kernel main-8d72c409c - 2022-02-07

Hi: Here are the kernel.full files some of you asked for. Let me know what else may be helpful to test. Thanks! Michael Jung Notes below * (UPDATED) * Started fresh Installed FreeBSD-14.0-CURRENT-amd64-20220113-0910a41ef3b-252413-disc1.iso with its accompany source tree. Built

Fw: Problem building openoffice

- Forwarded Message - From: Filippo Moretti To: off...@freebsd.org Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2021, 10:42:48 AM GMT+2Subject: Problem building openoffice Good morning,    I get the following error while attempting to update openoffice-4 on amd64 arc on

Fw: OpenZFS support merged: problem mounting ZFS within JAILs

Begin forwarded message: Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 14:06:12 +0200 From: "O. Hartmann" To: Matthew Macy Cc: freebsd-current , freebsd-fs , freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OpenZFS support merged: problem mounting ZFS within JAILs On Mon, 24 Aug 2020 19:38:53 -0700 Matthew Macy wrote:

Fw: Problem starting Xorg

- Forwarded Message - From: Filippo Moretti To: Niclas Zeising Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018, 9:46:59 AM GMT+2Subject: Re: Problem starting Xorg My mobo is a asus M4A87TD I enclose the files requiredthank youFilippo On Tuesday, October 2, 2018, 8:28:32 PM GMT+2, Niclas

Fw: Problem with buildkernel

- Forwarded Message - From: Filippo Moretti To: FreeBSD Current Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017, 6:42:26 PM GMT+2Subject: Problem with buildkernel After buildworld of yesterday the buildkernel fails with the following

Fw: Re: Problem with make installworld et alii

- Forwarded Message -From: Michael Butler To: Filippo Moretti ; Current Sent: Sunday, July 9, 2017, 4:50:13 PM GMT+2Subject: Re: Problem with make installworld et alii You need to a build newer than SVN r320652

Fw: Re: compiling on nfs directories

Hi all, I have some weird issues compiling software on a Linux client on a nfs directory served by FreeBSD 10 from a SSD-based RaidZ1. We are not sure yet what is actually going wrong, but it may be connected to make seeing wrong timestamps and thus compiling again during the install stage. I did

Fw: pkgng and pkgdb

hi, all: i used to use pkgdb -Ff along with old wonderful pkg_whatever to keep my freebsd station healthy. but i was told the new era of pkg is coming and so i made switch to pkgng. the question is: what is the equivalent of pkgdb -Ff? for pkg? for pkgdb -Ff, i am especially fond of its

Re: Fw: Lessons learned from source upgrade from FreeBSD i386 9.2 Stable to FreeBSD i386 10.0 Release.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Matthew Rezny matt...@reztek.cz wrote: Forwarded because my attempt to reply on list was rejected by heavy-handed and oblivious moderation: The freebsd-current mailing list is for issues involving FreeBSD-CURRENT, not FreeBSD-STABLE. Neither FreeBSD 9.x nor

Fw: Re: problems with libiconv into kernel

Em Mon, 16 Sep 2013 17:53:06 -0700, John-Mark Gurney escreveu Nilton Jose Rizzo wrote this message on Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 20:26 -0300: Em Mon, 16 Sep 2013 16:07:28 -0700, John-Mark Gurney escreveu Nilton Jose Rizzo wrote this message on Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 13:14 -0300: Last

Fw: Revision 250659 breaks down the build of the world

В Tue, 21 May 2013 12:00:54 -0500 Brooks Davis bro...@freebsd.org пишет: I belive this is now fixed in r250859. Sorry about the breakage. -- Brooks Unfortunately it did not fix the error when building the world. I still watch an error like this: --- /usr/bin/ld: this linker was not

Re: Fw: Revision 250659 breaks down the build of the world

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:08:56AM +0300, Ivan Klymenko wrote: ?? Tue, 21 May 2013 12:00:54 -0500 Brooks Davis bro...@freebsd.org ??: I belive this is now fixed in r250859. Sorry about the breakage. -- Brooks Unfortunately it did not fix the error when building the world.

Fw: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!

-Original Message- From: Michael Vale Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:57 AM To: Adrian Chadd Subject: Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too! oh i only replied to you, not the thread. I have some ideas though... -Original Message- From: Adrian Chadd

Re: Fw: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too!

On 10/24/2012 4:57 PM, Michael Vale wrote: -Original Message- From: Michael Vale Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:57 AM To: Adrian Chadd Subject: Re: FreeBSD in Google Code-In 2012? You can help too! oh i only replied to you, not the thread. I have some ideas though...

Fw: Re: packages that can generate arp storm

- Forwarded message from Rodrigo OSORIO rodr...@bebik.net - From: Rodrigo OSORIO rodr...@bebik.net Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 17:14:21 +0200 To: gahn ipfr...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: packages that can generate arp storm User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i On 04/04/12 07:33 -0700, gahn wrote: hi, gurus:

Fw: svn commit: r209554 - in head/usr.sbin/pc-sysinstall: . pc-sysinstall

If you updated after pc-sysinstall was committed, but before this commit, you'll have a stray /pc-sysinstall. It can and should be deleted. Warner ---BeginMessage--- Author: imp Date: Sun Jun 27 17:14:04 2010 New Revision: 209554 URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/209554 Log:

FW: build failures after stdlib update

-Original Message- From: Pegasus Mc Cleaft [mailto:k...@mthelicon.com] Sent: 23 March 2010 09:57 To: 'Alexander Best' Subject: RE: build failures after stdlib update -Original Message- 2. i wasn't able to reproduce your `make -V MACHINE_CPU -DCPUTYPE=native` examples. for me

Fw: [patch] combine mount_udf(8) with kiconv(3)

Hi, I was adviced to forward here, so that more poeple can see it. It was originally posted to fs@ and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, - Forwarded message from R. Imura [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 01:42:18 +0900 From: R. Imura [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [patch] combine

Fw: SATA drive lock-up

my verbose dmesg is in attached zip file, from today. my disks are connected with sata - pata converter based on marvel 88i8030 and one more question about ata3 and cable 40 wires, the cable actually is serial ata cable, not the 40 wires pata cable. and why it doesn't say then same thing about

natd fw punch rule leak found (and fix)

On a busy ftp site it was noticed that natd stopped punching ftp data session after some time, it was leaking the fw rule numbers allocated for punching. This happens if the ftp clients or ftp servers TCP layer was retransmitting the PORT/EPRT or the passive replies or as a DoS from a malicious

Re: natd fw punch rule leak found (and fix)

Ups, there you go when not testing your last optimization, it is required that a fw rule number is allocated for partial connections so the fix is just: in libalias/alias_db.c in PunchFWHole add the following after the initial packetAliasMode test: ClearFWHole(link); /FK

Re: FW: escalation stage 2 [was:RE: Big and ugly bug in 5.1-release]

Harald, When in doubt, install freebsd 5.x on a different drive running off of a different controller, mount the slices from one of the disks in the RAID array and copy your data to a safe and trusted location. Regards, Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant Silicon

RE: FW: escalation stage 2 [was:RE: Big and ugly bug in 5.1-release]

Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: Harald, When in doubt, install freebsd 5.x on a different drive running off of a different controller, mount the slices from one of the disks in the RAID array and copy your data to a safe and trusted location. Thanks for the hint, I did something like that.

FW: escalation stage 2 [was:RE: Big and ugly bug in 5.1-release]

*snip* Now the controller warns me that one drive is bad (which in fact is definatley not) and allows me to select continue boot If the controler says it's bad, it may well be. Now please give me a hint what to do. This is my brand new fileserver which collected all improtant data

Fw: 4.8 Kernel Compiling Error

the error that I was receiving was due the default directory of config was ../../ and it was incorrect you must specify the FQP of the kernel you are building and then make depend will work fine.. Thanks - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fw: Re: current and vmware2

Looks like this email didn't make it to the mailing list. I've not tried the solution yet, but I figured everyone would like to see this. James. Begin forwarded message: Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:14:32 +0900 From: Yoshinori KASAZAKI [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: James Satterfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

At Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:15:38 +0100 (CET), Michael Reifenberger wrote: On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Michael Reifenberger wrote: ... I have improved recovery code after timeout in -current. Could you try that? Is scheduled for this evening. Thanks so far! ... - fwcontorl -g 20 -

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Hidetoshi Shimokawa wrote: ... Do you have any timeout while the test? No. Not any longer. I think SBP_QUEUE_LEN or maxopenings is the important parameter. Can you try to change thoes values? The are at their defaults at the moment. Do you want me to increase them? Bye!

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

At Fri, 7 Feb 2003 10:56:33 +0100 (CET), Michael Reifenberger wrote: On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Hidetoshi Shimokawa wrote: ... Do you have any timeout while the test? No. Not any longer. I think SBP_QUEUE_LEN or maxopenings is the important parameter. Can you try to change thoes values?

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Michael Reifenberger wrote: ... I have improved recovery code after timeout in -current. Could you try that? Is scheduled for this evening. Thanks so far! ... - fwcontorl -g 20 - sysctl hw.firewire.sbp.max_speed=0 - change SBP_QUEUE_LEN in sbp.c to 1 and

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Hidetoshi Shimokawa wrote: Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 12:07:05 +0900 From: Hidetoshi Shimokawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Hidetoshi Shimokawa [EMAIL PROTECTED], FreeBSD-Current [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

I have improved recovery code after timeout in -current. Could you try that? /\ Hidetoshi Shimokawa \/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP public key: http://www.sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~simokawa/pgp.html At Sun, 2 Feb 2003 13:28:33 +0200, mike wrote: [1 text/plain; iso-8859-1 (7bit)] On Thu, 30 Jan 2003

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:41:59 +0900, Hidetoshi Shimokawa wrote Do you get timeout only for sbp0:0:0? Is the other drive still working? I have no problem with concurrent accesses with `iozone -s 102400m -r 1024k`. ... try some of the following: - fwcontorl -g 20 - sysctl

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

At Sun, 2 Feb 2003 13:28:33 +0200, mike wrote: try some of the following: - fwcontorl -g 20 - sysctl hw.firewire.sbp.max_speed=0 - change SBP_QUEUE_LEN in sbp.c to 1 and rebuld module. - sysctl machdep.cpu_idle_hlt=0 - sysctl debug.sbp_debug=1 and send me a dmesg. with

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

external FW-disks Do you get timeout only for sbp0:0:0? Is the other drive still working? yes, no. I have no problem with concurrent accesses with `iozone -s 102400m -r 1024k`. Me too when only with one drive at a time. Since they'r new, HW-defects are not impossible... try some

Re: -current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

Do you get timeout only for sbp0:0:0? Is the other drive still working? I have no problem with concurrent accesses with `iozone -s 102400m -r 1024k`. tty ad0 da0 da1 tin tout KB/t tps MB/s KB/t tps MB/s KB/t tps MB/s 21 360 0.00 0 0.00

-current, IBM A30p 2 external FW-disks

Hi, I have the following scenario: A30p == disk1 == disk2 disk1 and disk2 are identical 200GB disks in an extarnal ICE-cube case. My dmesg output is attached. After creating and mounting them as UFS2 filesystems under /mnt/a /mnt/b and starting a `iozone -s 102400m -r 1024k` in parallel under

Re: FW: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?

In message 006501c29d44$33a8e980$2603fb93@kloboucek, Petr Holub writes: Hi Poul, there's discussion in the -current list which we had before a while. I think answer to this is 'yes' but I'm not 100% sure so I wanted to check it with you. Thanks very much, Petr [...] I've discussed this issue

Re: FW: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?

On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I've discussed this issue with Poul-Henning Kamp. You need fsck from at least 4.7. Is this handled by fsck/setup.c,v 1.17.2.4 commit? Yes, this looks like the correct commit. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20

Re: FW: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nate Lawson wri tes: On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I've discussed this issue with Poul-Henning Kamp. You need fsck from at least 4.7. Is this handled by fsck/setup.c,v 1.17.2.4 commit? Yes, this looks like the correct commit. --

Fw: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20021118.tar.gz

As Nate kindly pointed out, my laptop needed a BIOS upgrade. With the upgrade, I can boot fine with ACPI enabled, although some sleep/suspend/resume stuff doesn't work right. Nate's already reported that. Thanks, Matt - Original Message - From: Matthew Emmerton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:

Re: Fw: hotspot 1.3.1 not such ansi.h file error

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Yuri Khotyaintsev [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: suken woo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:16 PM Subject: Re: hotspot 1.3.1 not such ansi.h file error This file was recently removed from

Re: FW: UMA question..

Jeff , (current included because it may be an interesting answer) As you know I'm using UMA to allocate threads and cache them. The 'constructor methods allow me to allocated threads that have been pre-set up with thread stacks and other special items. When they are being cached they

Fw: !!

Chris Hansen- Original Message -From: "friends" < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tue,25 Jun 2002 20:42:39 PMSubject: !!This e-mail is never sent unsolicited. If you need to unsubscribe, follow the instructions at the bottom of the

Fw: charming Love to ur lovers !

Hi Check the Attachement ..See ucassy_qt- Original Message -From: "friendshipbird" < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Fri,21 Jun 2002 13:34:37 PMSubject: charming Love to ur lovers !This e-mail is never sent unsolicited. If you need to unsubscribe, follow the

FW: Re: Error with post 1.1 release Postfix and Cyrus -Possible Bug in VM system

Do we have anyone working on the VM system that could look at this? - Forwarded message from Wietse Venema [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:49:10 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: Postfix users [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wietse Venema) To: Postfix users [EMAIL

Re: FW: Re: windbindd

Hi, Is there any way to impliment dl_open in our nsswitch for -current so that samba's winbindd can work on FreeBSD? no. There are plans to write a nssd proxy deamon for FreeBSD which does support loadable modules. I'll make nectar and my plans available in the next time. The goal is the

Re: FW: Re: windbindd

Martin Blapp wrote: Is there any way to impliment dl_open in our nsswitch for -current so that samba's winbindd can work on FreeBSD? no. It's actually not that hard to write a libdlopen that mmap's exectuable the ld.so itself, and then does manual lookup of the dl entry points, providing

Re: FW: Re: windbindd

hi, there! On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 03:55:28AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: Is there any way to impliment dl_open in our nsswitch for -current so that samba's winbindd can work on FreeBSD? no. It's actually not that hard to write a libdlopen that mmap's exectuable the ld.so itself,

Re: FW: Re: windbindd

Max Khon wrote: On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 03:55:28AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: Is there any way to impliment dl_open in our nsswitch for -current so that samba's winbindd can work on FreeBSD? no. It's actually not that hard to write a libdlopen that mmap's exectuable the

Re: FW: Re: windbindd

It's actually not that hard to write a libdlopen that mmap's exectuable the ld.so itself, and then does manual lookup of the dl entry points, providing symbols for them which are actually externed functions wrapping dereferenced function pointers. It's just that no one has

FW: Re: windbindd

Is there any way to impliment dl_open in our nsswitch for -current so that samba's winbindd can work on FreeBSD? - Forwarded message from Richard Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:29:24 +1030 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Richard Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:

Fw: Logitech iFeel Optical USB Mouse cannot be attached.

The following is the output of usbdevs -v # usbdevs -v Controller /dev/usb0: addr 1: self powered, config 1, UHCI root hub(0x), VIA(0x), rev 0x0100 port 1 powered port 2 powered This is with the mouse attached? If it doesn't even show up, that would point

FW: USB Multimedia Card (MMC) readers supported?

Try [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more information. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim Bryant Sent: 20 September 2001 15:19 To: Konstantin Chuguev Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: USB Multimedia Card (MMC) readers

FW: Snapshot Log

World broke? -FW: [EMAIL PROTECTED]- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 08:37:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Deimos Root [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Snapshot Log cc -nostdinc -O -pipe -I/usr/src/lib/libpam/libpam/../../../contrib/libpam/libpam/include -I/usr/src/lib

FW: Snapshot Log - world broken in telnetd

It looks like the recent changes wrt to libpam in telnetd may have broken world. -FW: [EMAIL PROTECTED]- Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 09:11:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Deimos Root [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Snapshot Log === libexec/telnetd cc -O -pipe

RE: FW: Snapshot Log - world broken in telnetd

On 10-May-01 John Baldwin wrote: It looks like the recent changes wrt to libpam in telnetd may have broken world. Correction, world appears to be ok, just release is broken. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc

Re: FW: Snapshot Log - world broken in telnetd

On Thu, 10 May 2001, John Baldwin wrote: It looks like the recent changes wrt to libpam in telnetd may have broken world. ... cc -O -pipe -DLINEMODE -DUSE_TERMIO -DDIAGNOSTICS -DOLD_ENVIRON -DENV_HACK -DAUTHENTICATION -DENCRYPTION -I/usr/src/kerberos

Re: FW: Snapshot Log - world broken in telnetd

On Fri, 11 May 2001 03:16:35 +1000 (EST), Bruce Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: The kerberosIV telnetd is missing linkage to libpam, perhaps more. The kerberosIV telnet and telnetd are missing linkage to libpam, for about three days. Just adding that lib makes it work ... -- Michael

FW: Snapshot Log - world broken

=== libpam/modules/pam_tacplus cc -O -pipe -Wall -I/usr/src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_tacplus/../../../../contrib/libpam/libpam/incl ude -I/usr/src/lib/libpam/mo dules/pam_tacplus/../../libpam -I/usr/obj/usr/src/i386/usr/include -c /usr/src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_tacplus/pam_tacplus.c -o

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Doug Barton wrote: Alfred Perlstein wrote: I'm figuring the only time when it may be a problem is on machines with a small amount of memory. Since memory is cheap, I plan on turning it on within the next couple of days unless a stability issue comes up. I'll leave it to those

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Alfred Perlstein wrote: * Maxim Sobolev [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010419 05:48] wrote: Doug Barton wrote: Alfred Perlstein wrote: I'm figuring the only time when it may be a problem is on machines with a small amount of memory. Since memory is cheap, I plan on turning it on

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

* Maxim Sobolev [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010419 06:20] wrote: OOPS, I see. See updated patch. Looks ok. Index: Makefile === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/etc/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.248 diff -d -u -r1.248 Makefile ---

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 03:46:39PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote: What do you think about attached patch? -Maxim Index: Makefile === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/etc/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.248 diff -d -u -r1.248

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Maxim Sobolev wrote: What do you think about attached patch? Definitely the right idea, however I'm waiting on input from a couple people on some additional suggestions, so if you'd hold off I'd appreciate it. -- "One thing they don't tell you about doing experimental physics is

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Doug Barton wrote: Maxim Sobolev wrote: What do you think about attached patch? Definitely the right idea, however I'm waiting on input from a couple people on some additional suggestions, so if you'd hold off I'd appreciate it. Unfortunately I've already cvs ci it. :(

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

: :What do you think about attached patch? : :-Maxim mmm.. I think it would just confuse the issue and prevent us from being able to change the kernel default trivially. 99.5% of the FreeBSD boxes out there are just going to want it to be on by default. We could provide a

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Matt Dillon wrote: : :What do you think about attached patch? : :-Maxim mmm.. I think it would just confuse the issue and prevent us from being able to change the kernel default trivially. 99.5% of the FreeBSD boxes out there are just going to want it to be on by default.

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

:But we already have sysctl.conf and appropriate rc.sysctl, haven't we? What's :wrong with putting some useful payload into it? : :-Maxim If it's commented out, it's fine. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

:But we already have sysctl.conf and appropriate rc.sysctl, haven't we? What's :wrong with putting some useful payload into it? : :-Maxim Let me explain a little more. If it's commented out, it's fine. But if you are actually setting a value in there you will override whatever is

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:39:58 -0700, Matt Dillon wrote: :But we already have sysctl.conf and appropriate rc.sysctl, haven't we? What's :wrong with putting some useful payload into it? : :-Maxim Let me explain a little more. If it's commented out, it's fine. But if you are

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

: set that default in stone and prevent us from being able to change : it with a new kernel rev. This being a *kernel* specific feature, : we need to have control over the default in the kernel itself. : :What about simple check in the kernel: if total memory is above 64Mb, then

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:47:20 -0700, Matt Dillon wrote: : set that default in stone and prevent us from being able to change : it with a new kernel rev. This being a *kernel* specific feature, : we need to have control over the default in the kernel itself. : :What about

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:39:58 -0700, Matt Dillon wrote: Let me explain a little more. If it's commented out, it's fine. But if you are actually setting a value in there you will override whatever is set in the kernel. When

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

-On [20010417 20:47], Matt Dillon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Testing it 'on' in stable on production systems and observing the relative change in performance is a worthy experiment. Testing it 'on' in current is just an experiment. I have been running vfs.vmiodirenable=1 on two

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

-On [20010418 01:00], Alfred Perlstein ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: (although afaik we're basing it on both Solaris and BSD/os's implementation so... well I'm not going to bother defending it.) You just scared the shit out of me by mentioning Solaris. I've found Solaris to be a PITA with all

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote: -On [20010417 20:47], Matt Dillon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Testing it 'on' in stable on production systems and observing the relative change in performance is a worthy experiment. Testing it 'on' in current is just an

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

-On [20010418 14:38], Bruce Evans ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [vfs.vmiodirenable] So, how much slower was it? ;-) Not noticeable for me at least. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven/Asmodai --=-- asmodai@[wxs.nl|freebsd.org] Documentation nutter/C-rated Coder BSD: Technical excellence at its

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On 18 Apr 2001, at 22:16, Bruce Evans wrote: On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote: -On [20010417 20:47], Matt Dillon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Testing it 'on' in stable on production systems and observing the relative change in performance is a worthy experiment.

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Doug Barton wrote: OK... this brings up the question of what other cool optimizations are there that may have been disabled in the past for reasons that are no longer pertinent? It might be worthwhile to create an /etc/sysctl.conf file with commented out examples

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Matt Dillon wrote: It is not implying that at all. There is no black and white here. This is a case where spending a huge amount of time and complexity to get the efficiency down to the Nth degree is nothing but a waste of time. What matters is what the user sees, what

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

* Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010417 01:08] wrote: Matt Dillon wrote: It is not implying that at all. There is no black and white here. This is a case where spending a huge amount of time and complexity to get the efficiency down to the Nth degree is nothing but a waste

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

* Matt Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010415 23:16] wrote: For example, all this work on a preemptive kernel is just insane. Our entire kernel is built on the concept of not being preemptable except by interrupts. We virtually guarentee years of

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Alfred Perlstein wrote: I'm figuring the only time when it may be a problem is on machines with a small amount of memory. Since memory is cheap, I plan on turning it on within the next couple of days unless a stability issue comes up. I'll leave it to those people with low memory to

Re: FW: Snapshot Log - current broke

Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 12:34:39 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] === usr.sbin/pcvt/vttest cc -O -pipe -traditional -DUSEMYSTTY -I/usr/obj/usr/src/i386/usr/include -c /usr/src/usr.sbin/pcvt/vttest/main.c cc -O -pipe -traditional -DUSEMYSTTY

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

: :There's actually very little code that non-premptable once we get the :kernel mutexed. The least complex way to accomplish this is to only :preempt kernel processes that hold no mutex (low level) locks. : :-- :-Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]] I wish it were that

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

You need to settle dude, pre-emption isn't a goal, it's mearly a _possible_ side effect. We're not aiming for pre-emption, we're aiming for more concurrancy. * Matt Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010417 13:51] wrote: : :There's actually very little code that non-premptable once we get the

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

: :You need to settle dude, pre-emption isn't a goal, it's mearly a :_possible_ side effect. : :We're not aiming for pre-emption, we're aiming for more concurrancy. A goal of having more concurrency is laudable, but I think you are ignoring the costs of doing task switches verses the

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Matt Dillon wrote: :You need to settle dude, pre-emption isn't a goal, it's mearly a :_possible_ side effect. : :We're not aiming for pre-emption, we're aiming for more concurrancy. A goal of having more concurrency is laudable, but I think you are ignoring

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

* Matt Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010417 14:07] wrote: : :You need to settle dude, pre-emption isn't a goal, it's mearly a :_possible_ side effect. : :We're not aiming for pre-emption, we're aiming for more concurrancy. A goal of having more concurrency is laudable, but I think you

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

:Once the mutexes are in place the underlying implementation can :change pretty easily from task switching always to only task :switching when the mutex is owned by the same CPU that I'm running :on. (to avoid spinlock deadlock) That makes *NO* *SENSE* Alfred! So the first step is to

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 14:52:06 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] Disclaimer: I am not a kernel hacker. The goal is to have a kernel that's able to have more concurrancy, Right... things like pre-emption and task switching on mutex collisions can be examined and possibly

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

* Matt Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010417 15:00] wrote: :Once the mutexes are in place the underlying implementation can :change pretty easily from task switching always to only task :switching when the mutex is owned by the same CPU that I'm running :on. (to avoid spinlock deadlock)

Re: FW: Snapshot Log - current broke

On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, David Wolfskill wrote: Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 12:34:39 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... In file included from /usr/src/usr.sbin/pcvt/vttest/header.h:26, from /usr/src/usr.sbin/pcvt/vttest/main.c:20:

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 22:18:34 + (GMT) From: E.B. Dreger [EMAIL PROTECTED] My instinct (whatever it's worth; remember my disclaimer) is that co-op switching using something like tsleep() and wakeup_one() or similar would be more efficient than trying to screw with mutexes. Oops. I

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Justin T. Gibbs wrote: There's no downside, really. It just seems inelegant to have a system that, on paper, is so inefficient. Can't we do better? Sure. Don't discard buffer contents when recycling a B_MALLOC'ed buffer, but manage it using a secondary buffer

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

I don't consider it inefficient. Sure, if you look at this one aspect of the caching taken out of context it may appear to be inefficient, but if you look at the whole enchilada the memory issue is nothing more then a minor footnote - not worth the effort of worrying about.

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

: :I don't consider it inefficient. Sure, if you look at this one aspect :of the caching taken out of context it may appear to be inefficient, :but if you look at the whole enchilada the memory issue is nothing :more then a minor footnote - not worth the effort of worrying

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

"Justin T. Gibbs" wrote: I notice that this option is off by default. Can you give a general idea of when it should be enabled, when it should be disabled, and what bad things might result with it on? It consumes a full page per-directory even though the majority of directories in a

Re: FW: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost

:It is my understanding that with the new directory layout strategies, this :will be improved somewhat. ie: a single page is much more likely to cache :up to 8 directories. : :Cheers, :-Peter :-- :Peter Wemm - [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] :"All of this is for nothing

  1   2   >