Re: kernel panic

On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote: On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote: Hi, I am a kgdb newbie, so please be patient. I suspect (just based on the fact that this is the 4th time I edit text files on my NTFS partition through ntfs-3g, using Emacs,

Re: sysinstall compilation issue

--- On Fri, 8/8/08, Oliver Fromme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Oliver Fromme [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: sysinstall compilation issue To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, August 8, 2008, 9:36 PM Unga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is i386 RELENG_7.

neighbor discovery problem

Hi, Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing some strange things happening. For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do : $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2:: traceroute6 to 2a01:678:100:2:: (2a01:678:100:2::) from 2a01:678:1:443::443, 64 hops max,

Re: neighbor discovery problem

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:45:48AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing some strange things happening. For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do : $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2:: traceroute6 to

Re: cpufreq(4) panic on RELENG_7 (was: Re: Call for bfe(4) testers.)

2008/8/11 John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Monday 11 August 2008 12:35:17 pm pluknet wrote: 2008/8/11 John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Saturday 09 August 2008 07:16:37 am Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: Hi John, I now figured out the who, the why still eludes me. So, after your MFC of

Re: umtxn and Apache 2.2

On Aug 12, 2008, at 12:12 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: Borja Marcos wrote: Hello, I'm running a server with FreeBSD 7-STABLE as of August 8, Apache 2.2 with mpm/worker and threads support, and PHP 5.2.6. Everything works like a charm, but I see that Apache is leaking processes that get stuck in

Re: HEADS UP: inpcb/inpcbinfo rwlocking: coming to a 7-STABLE branch near you

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008, Mike Tancsa wrote: At 05:21 PM 8/8/2008, Robert Watson wrote: http://www.watson.org/~robert/freebsd/netperf/20080808-7stable-rwlock-inpcb.diff These incude the inpcb/inpcbinfo read/write locking changes (although not yet for raw/divert sockets). Any testing,

Re: umtxn and Apache 2.2

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:17:05PM +0200, Borja Marcos wrote: On Aug 12, 2008, at 12:12 AM, Ivan Voras wrote: Borja Marcos wrote: Hello, I'm running a server with FreeBSD 7-STABLE as of August 8, Apache 2.2 with mpm/worker and threads support, and PHP 5.2.6. Everything works like a

lagg(4) and failover

Hi Folks, I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the failover is implemented. The manpage isn't quite clear: failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port. If the master port becomes unavailable, the next active port is

Re: lagg(4) and failover

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote: I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the failover is implemented. The manpage isn't quite clear: failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port. If

Re: Ath driver causes kernel panic (page fault) on 7.0-STABLE during use

Hi, On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 21:37, Edward Ruggeri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently purchased a Lenovo ThinkPad with a ThinkPad 11a/b/g Wireless LAN Mini Express Adapter (based on the AR5212 chipset). I got kernel panics while using the wireless card under 7-STABLE Do you still have this

Re: neighbor discovery problem

Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing some strange things happening. For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do : $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2:: traceroute6 to 2a01:678:100:2:: (2a01:678:100:2::) from 2a01:678:1:443::443, 64 hops max,

Re: lagg(4) and failover

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:55:52 +0800, Eugene Grosbein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote: I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the failover is implemented. The manpage isn't quite clear: failover

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6. | | Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A in traceroute commonly | means there's an ACL blocking said packets: | | !A (communication with destination network administratively

Re: lagg(4) and failover

On 2008-Aug-12 18:55:52 +0800, Eugene Grosbein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote: I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the failover is implemented. As far as I can tell, not especially well :-(. It doesn't

Re: lagg(4) and failover

However, IMO lacp doesn't solve that problem. lacp is used for link aggregation, not failover. It does both - if one of the links becomes unavailable then it will stop using it. We use this for failover and it works fine, the only caveat being that your LACP device at the far end needs to look

Re: neighbor discovery problem

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:17:27PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: +-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6. | | Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A in traceroute commonly | means there's an ACL blocking said

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 13:17:27 +0200, Mathieu Arnold a dit : | +-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : || Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6. || || Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A in traceroute commonly || means there's an ACL blocking said packets: ||

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 12:02:42 +0100, Pete French a dit : | Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm seeing | some strange things happening. | | For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do : | | $ traceroute6 -n 2a01:678:100:2:: | traceroute6 to

Re: neighbor discovery problem

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 01:34:35PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: +-le 12.08.2008 13:17:27 +0200, Mathieu Arnold a dit : | +-le 12.08.2008 01:34:03 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : || Important note: I know absolutely nothing about IPv6. || || Do you have ACLs on any of these machines? !A

Re: lagg(4) and failover

As far as I can tell, not especially well :-(. It doesn't seem to detect much short of layer 1 failure. In particular, shutting down the switch port will not trigger a failover. Are you using bce devices as your phsyical interfaces ? Take a look at the thread from last week about ifconfig -

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 04:31:23 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | Sorry if it sounds like I'm doubting you, but !A really looks like an | ACL thing. Oh, and in traceroute(8), !A is !A (communication with destination network administratively prohibited, which is just right from your point of view, but,

Re: lagg(4) and failover

Hi Pete, On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:30:12 +0100, Pete French [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, IMO lacp doesn't solve that problem. lacp is used for link aggregation, not failover. It does both - if one of the links becomes unavailable then it will stop using it. We use this for failover and it

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is | implicit on RELENG_7). the gateway is a 6.2 ;-) | Do you see state mismatches? pfctl -s info. There are some, but, hum searches408816380699

Re: em(4) on FreeBSD is sometimes annoying

For what it's worth, I have a T60 that dual boots 6.3-R/amd64 and 7.0-R/i386 and neither install has this problem. I can cold boot it with the NIC unplugged, plug in a cable, I get a link light and ifconfig em0 goes to active, dhclient em0 gets an IP successfully. Did you try to run

Re: neighbor discovery problem

Hum, 2a01:678:1:443::443 is a /64, and 2a01:678:100:2:: is on a /48, both have the same gateway, that is, the same box, which has : inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64 inet6 2a01:678:100:: prefixlen 48 O.K., that should work. My best advice here is to do what I did - which is

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is | implicit on RELENG_7). I've just tried doing pfctl -d, and not help, I *really* don't believe that it's a pf problem ;-) -- Mathieu Arnold pgp0e94czU8F1.pgp

Re: lagg(4) and failover

On 2008-Aug-12 13:43:29 +0200, Marian Hettwer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lagg is to handle failover at the physical layer for when one of your ether ports fails, or someone unplugs a cable. If I understand you Thats unfortunate... I tend to agree. bonding in Linux is capable of doing this and

Re: neighbor discovery problem

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 02:01:45PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: +-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is | implicit on RELENG_7). I've just tried doing pfctl -d, and not help, I *really* don't believe that

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 12:50:35 +0100, Pete French a dit : | Hum, 2a01:678:1:443::443 is a /64, and 2a01:678:100:2:: is on a /48, both | have the same gateway, that is, the same box, which has : | inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64 | inet6 2a01:678:100:: prefixlen 48 | | O.K., that

Re: lagg(4) and failover

Hi Max, On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:00:18 +0200, Max Laier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thats unfortunate... bonding in Linux is capable of doing this and solaris too. Well then. At least everythings clear now. And in the end, clarifing things was the reason for that mail thread :) You are looking

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 05:10:05 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 02:01:45PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: | +-le 12.08.2008 04:36:57 -0700, Jeremy Chadwick a dit : | | A pass on RELENG_7 will still cause state to be kept (keep state is | | implicit on RELENG_7). | | I've just

Re: lagg(4) and failover

Hi Peter, On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:03:07 +1000, Peter Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-Aug-12 13:43:29 +0200, Marian Hettwer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lagg is to handle failover at the physical layer for when one of your ether ports fails, or someone unplugs a cable. If I understand you

Re: neighbor discovery problem

The network is pretty simple, gateway : em0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 options=bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU inet6 fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet6 2a01:678:1:443:: prefixlen 64 inet6 2a01:678:100::

Re: Ath driver causes kernel panic (page fault) on 7.0-STABLE during use

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Thomas Zander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 21:37, Edward Ruggeri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently purchased a Lenovo ThinkPad with a ThinkPad 11a/b/g Wireless LAN Mini Express Adapter (based on the AR5212 chipset). I got kernel

Re: neighbor discovery problem

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 13:35:33 Mathieu Arnold wrote: +-le 12.08.2008 12:02:42 +0100, Pete French a dit : | Since I added IPv6 to my network, and started really using it, I'm | seeing some strange things happening. | | For instance, I'm on machine 2a01:678:1:443::443, and I do : | | $

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 13:26:00 +0100, Pete French a dit : | The network is pretty simple, | | gateway : | em0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 | options=bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU | inet6 fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 | inet6

Re: kernel panic

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:42:52 am Johan Kuuse wrote: On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote: On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote: Hi, I am a kgdb newbie, so please be patient. I suspect (just based on the fact that this is the 4th time I edit

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 14:53:00 +0200, Mathieu Arnold a dit : | I'll investigate. Ok, I rebooted the gateway, and now, it works just as it should... Maybe once upon a time, I did something strange, which borked everything... Anyway, thanks all :-) -- Mathieu Arnold pgpFAKhbnBRan.pgp Description:

Re: neighbor discovery problem

+-le 12.08.2008 14:53:24 +0200, Max Laier a dit : | 2a01:678:1:443::443 2a01:678:100:2::: ICMP6, echo request, seq 0, length | 16 fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead ff02::1:ff00:0: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, | who has 2a01:678:100:2::, length 32 | fe80::207:e9ff:fe0e:dead 2a01:678:1:443::443: ICMP6,

Re: cpufreq(4) panic on RELENG_7 (was: Re: Call for bfe(4) testers.)

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 04:36:29 am pluknet wrote: 2008/8/11 John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Monday 11 August 2008 12:35:17 pm pluknet wrote: 2008/8/11 John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Saturday 09 August 2008 07:16:37 am Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: Hi John, I now figured out

Re: lagg(4) and failover

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote: Hi Folks, I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the failover is implemented. The manpage isn't quite clear: failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port. If

Re: lagg(4) and failover

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 09:24:30PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2008-Aug-12 18:55:52 +0800, Eugene Grosbein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote: I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the failover is

command not found: problem with dash in filenames

NOTICE: when I run purepw it is located and runned, but when I run pure-pw (NOTICE: dash in name) I get: Command not found kes# env |grep PATH PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/games:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/root/bin kes# env | grep PATH

Re: kernel panic

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:42:52 am Johan Kuuse wrote: On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote: On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote: Hi, I am a kgdb newbie, so please be patient. I suspect (just based on the fact that this is the 4th time I edit

Re: kernel panic

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:23:30 pm Johan Kuuse wrote: On Tuesday 12 August 2008 02:42:52 am Johan Kuuse wrote: On Monday 11 August 2008 23:04:30 John Baldwin wrote: On Sunday 10 August 2008 10:01:49 pm Johan Kuuse wrote: Hi, I am a kgdb newbie, so please be patient. I

Re: 6.3 (ish) hang on reboot w/ Supermicro C2SBA+

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have a 6.3 (RELENG_6 a bit past 6.3 actually) system which hangs when I try and reboot (or shutdown). It has a Supermicro C2SBA+, 2ware 9650SE and Core2Duo CPU. It shuts down as normal except after printing the

Re: command not found: problem with dash in filenames

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:00:02PM +0400, KES wrote: NOTICE: when I run purepw it is located and runned, but when I run pure-pw (NOTICE: dash in name) I get: Command not found Did you by any chance just install this binary? Have you tried running 'rehash' and trying again? Brix -- Henrik

Re: Hardware monitoring for Intel Atom D945GCLF.

Jeremy Chadwick pisze: On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitoring. I might have to look at lm-sensors from Linux, but that code is very

Re: Hardware monitoring for Intel Atom D945GCLF.

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:38:11PM +0200, Eugene Butusov wrote: Jeremy Chadwick pisze: On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 04:45:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: I don't need an API, but this kind of statement makes Intel sound like they're not willing to disclose the SMBus offsets for monitoring. I

Fwd: Re: command not found: problem with dash in filenames

- Forwarded message from KES [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: KES [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:40:08 +0400 Subject: Re: command not found: problem with dash in filenames 12.08.08, 22:25, Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Aug 12, 2008

Re: sysinstall compilation issue

--- On Tue, 8/12/08, Unga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Unga [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: sysinstall compilation issue To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2008, 3:28 PM --- On Fri, 8/8/08, Oliver Fromme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Oliver