On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:19 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/6/11 John Baldwin :
>> On Friday 11 June 2010 6:27:48 am Giovanni Trematerra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:35 PM, David DEMELIER
>> wrote:
>>> >> Good news
2010/6/11 John Baldwin :
> On Friday 11 June 2010 6:27:48 am Giovanni Trematerra wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:35 PM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>> >> Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
>> >>
>> >> http://img63.im
On Friday 11 June 2010 6:27:48 am Giovanni Trematerra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:35 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> >> Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
> >>
> >> http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4244/dsc00361g.j
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
wrote:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:35 PM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>> Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
>>
>> http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4244/dsc00361g.jpg
>>
>
> Into the file sys/dev/acpica/acpi_cpu.c at the end of acpi_cp
2010/5/26 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:01 PM, David DEMELIER
>> wrote:
>>> 2010/5/26 Giovanni Trematerra :
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:14 AM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:01 PM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>> 2010/5/26 Giovanni Trematerra :
>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:14 AM, David DEMELIER
>>> wrote:
2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:52 PM, D
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:01 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/26 Giovanni Trematerra :
>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:14 AM, David DEMELIER
>> wrote:
>>> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:52 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
>
2010/5/26 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:14 AM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
>>> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:52 PM, David DEMELIER
>>> wrote:
2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:43 PM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>>
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:14 AM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
>> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:52 PM, David DEMELIER
>> wrote:
>>> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:43 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/12 Giovanni Trematerra :
>>
2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:52 PM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
>>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:43 PM, David DEMELIER
>>> wrote:
2010/5/12 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Demelier David
> wrote:
>>>
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:52 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:43 PM, David DEMELIER
>> wrote:
>>> 2010/5/12 Giovanni Trematerra :
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Demelier David
wrote:
> Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200,
2010/5/25 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:43 PM, David DEMELIER
> wrote:
>> 2010/5/12 Giovanni Trematerra :
>>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Demelier David
>>> wrote:
Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200, Giovanni Trematerra a écrit :
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:08
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:43 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> 2010/5/12 Giovanni Trematerra :
>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Demelier David
>> wrote:
>>> Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200, Giovanni Trematerra a écrit :
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Demelier David
wrote:
> H
2010/5/12 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Demelier David
> wrote:
>> Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200, Giovanni Trematerra a écrit :
>>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Demelier David
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> > I noticed that pluggin the AC adaptor when I boo
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Brandon Gooch
wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Giovanni Trematerra
> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Brandon Gooch
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
>>> wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Brandon Go
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Giovanni Trematerra
wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Brandon Gooch
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Brandon Gooch
>>> wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Attilio Rao
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Brandon Gooch
wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Brandon Gooch
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
2010/5/12 David DEMELIER :
> I remove the patch, and
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Giovanni Trematerra
wrote:
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Brandon Gooch
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
>>> 2010/5/12 David DEMELIER :
I remove the patch, and built the kernel (I updated the src this
morning) and it d
on 14/05/2010 03:25 Giovanni Trematerra said the following:
> Attilio and I came up with this patch. It seems ready for stress
> testing and review
> Please test and report back.
It seems that there is inconsistent indentation for some of new lines.
Original style seems to be softtabstop=4 tabstop
2010/5/14 Giovanni Trematerra :
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Brandon Gooch
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
>>> 2010/5/12 David DEMELIER :
I remove the patch, and built the kernel (I updated the src this
morning) and it does not panic now. It's reall
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Brandon Gooch
wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
>> 2010/5/12 David DEMELIER :
>>> I remove the patch, and built the kernel (I updated the src this
>>> morning) and it does not panic now. It's really odd. If it reappears
>>> soon I will t
> Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 00:09:05 -0700
> From: per...@pluto.rain.com
>
> "Kevin Oberman" wrote:
>
> > ... TCC and throttling ...
> > they were intended for thermal management, not power management.
>
> Shouldn't the two be equivalent? Heat generated is directly related
> to power consumed.
T
"Kevin Oberman" wrote:
> ... TCC and throttling ...
> they were intended for thermal management, not power management.
Shouldn't the two be equivalent? Heat generated is directly related
to power consumed.
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
h
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Attilio Rao wrote:
> 2010/5/12 David DEMELIER :
>> I remove the patch, and built the kernel (I updated the src this
>> morning) and it does not panic now. It's really odd. If it reappears
>> soon I will tell you.
>
> I looked at the code with Giovanni and I have th
2010/5/12 David DEMELIER :
> I remove the patch, and built the kernel (I updated the src this
> morning) and it does not panic now. It's really odd. If it reappears
> soon I will tell you.
I looked at the code with Giovanni and I have the feeling that the
race with the idle thread may still be fat
I remove the patch, and built the kernel (I updated the src this
morning) and it does not panic now. It's really odd. If it reappears
soon I will tell you.
Thanks.
--
Demelier David
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/m
> Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 15:35:51 +0200
> From: David DEMELIER
> Sender: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org
>
> Hi, I tested your patch and it didn't panic. I checked the dev.cpu
> sysctl nodes to see if the CPU freq is changing or not.
>
> I unplugged the cable :
> mark...@melon ~ $ sysctl dev.cp
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:35 PM, David DEMELIER
wrote:
> Hi, I tested your patch and it didn't panic. I checked the dev.cpu
> sysctl nodes to see if the CPU freq is changing or not.
>
It's very odd. I did nothing to prevent panic. in fact you should have
seen a panic.
did you apply the patch on a
Hi, I tested your patch and it didn't panic. I checked the dev.cpu
sysctl nodes to see if the CPU freq is changing or not.
I unplugged the cable :
mark...@melon ~ $ sysctl dev.cpu
dev.cpu.0.%desc: ACPI CPU
dev.cpu.0.%driver: cpu
dev.cpu.0.%location: handle=\_PR_.CPU0
dev.cpu.0.%pnpinfo: _HID=none
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Demelier David wrote:
> Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200, Giovanni Trematerra a écrit :
>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Demelier David
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > I noticed that pluggin the AC adaptor when I boot without it does
>> > not
>> > pa
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 08:33:46PM +0200, Demelier David wrote:
> Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200, Giovanni Trematerra a écrit :
> > On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Demelier David
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >I noticed that pluggin the AC adaptor when I boot without it does
> > > not
Le Vendredi 07 mai 2010 à 18:22 +0200, Giovanni Trematerra a écrit :
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Demelier David
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >I noticed that pluggin the AC adaptor when I boot without it does not
> >panic. It only panic when removing it.
> >
> >Maybe that could
Would you be so kind to try to revert this patch?
I'm just guessing
You have to pass -R flag to patch program to apply the patch
=
--- head/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_acad.c 2009/06/05 18:44:36 193530
+++ head/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_acad.c 2009/09/30 17:07:49 197649
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 12:45:46PM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote:
> Please try this patch:
>
> Index: acpi_cpu.c
> ===
> --- acpi_cpu.c(revision 207322)
> +++ acpi_cpu.c(working copy)
> @@ -997,12 +997,12 @@
> if (notify
Please try this patch:
Index: acpi_cpu.c
===
--- acpi_cpu.c (revision 207322)
+++ acpi_cpu.c (working copy)
@@ -997,12 +997,12 @@
if (notify != ACPI_NOTIFY_CX_STATES)
return;
+ACPI_SERIAL_BEGIN(cpu);
/* Updat
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 10:49:23AM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote:
>
> On 5 May 2010, at 08:40, Demelier David wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 01:19:45AM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote:
> >> On 4 May 2010, at 21:38, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:27:23PM +0200, David DEMELIER
On 5 May 2010, at 08:40, Demelier David wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 01:19:45AM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On 4 May 2010, at 21:38, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:27:23PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
2010/5/4 Kostik Belousov :
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 06:3
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 01:19:45AM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 4 May 2010, at 21:38, Kostik Belousov wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:27:23PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> >> 2010/5/4 Kostik Belousov :
> >>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 06:35:52PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> Good news
On 4 May 2010, at 21:38, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:27:23PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
>> 2010/5/4 Kostik Belousov :
>>> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 06:35:52PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
http://img63.imageshac
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:27:23PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> 2010/5/4 Kostik Belousov :
> > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 06:35:52PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> >> Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
> >>
> >> http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4244/dsc00361g.jpg
> >
> > Please try addi
2010/5/4 Kostik Belousov :
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 06:35:52PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
>> Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
>>
>> http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4244/dsc00361g.jpg
>
> Please try adding code fragment like this:
> if (cx_next->p_lvlx == NULL)
>
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 06:35:52PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
>
> http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4244/dsc00361g.jpg
Please try adding code fragment like this:
if (cx_next->p_lvlx == NULL)
printf("Going to panic.\n");
to
Good news ! It worked, check the picture here :
http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/4244/dsc00361g.jpg
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsu
I made a panic and it said Dumping 1176Mb but even after 5 minutes
there was no output. Usually you'll have something like Dumping
1176Mb: 1176 1040 960 ... etc ?
Here it's stays at Dumping 1176Mb: and no changes.
Cheers,
David.
___
freebsd-stable@freeb
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:41:18AM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> 2010/5/4 Jeremy Chadwick :
> > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:32:14AM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> >> Since I added dumpdev="/dev/ad4s1b" in my /boot/loader.conf it does
> >> not panic anymore ...
> >>
> >> I'm not lucky (or ?).
> >
>
2010/5/4 Jeremy Chadwick :
> On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:32:14AM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
>> Since I added dumpdev="/dev/ad4s1b" in my /boot/loader.conf it does
>> not panic anymore ...
>>
>> I'm not lucky (or ?).
>
> 1) dumpdev="xxx" should go into /etc/rc.conf, not /boot/loader.conf.
> Putting
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:32:14AM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> Since I added dumpdev="/dev/ad4s1b" in my /boot/loader.conf it does
> not panic anymore ...
>
> I'm not lucky (or ?).
1) dumpdev="xxx" should go into /etc/rc.conf, not /boot/loader.conf.
Putting in in /boot/loader.conf will change/
On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 11:57:28PM +0200, David DEMELIER wrote:
> 2010/5/3 David DEMELIER :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just updated my 8.0-STABLE/amd64 today around 17h CEST, and it just
> > panics when I unplug my AC. The current process = 11 (idle: cpu1) is
> > this related to the cpufreq and related stu
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 4:57 PM, David DEMELIER wrote:
> 2010/5/3 David DEMELIER :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my 8.0-STABLE/amd64 today around 17h CEST, and it just
>> panics when I unplug my AC. The current process = 11 (idle: cpu1) is
>> this related to the cpufreq and related stuff ?
>>
>> It
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 2:57 PM, David DEMELIER wrote:
> 2010/5/3 David DEMELIER :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my 8.0-STABLE/amd64 today around 17h CEST, and it just
>> panics when I unplug my AC. The current process = 11 (idle: cpu1) is
>> this related to the cpufreq and related stuff ?
>>
>> It
2010/5/3 David DEMELIER :
> Hi,
>
> I just updated my 8.0-STABLE/amd64 today around 17h CEST, and it just
> panics when I unplug my AC. The current process = 11 (idle: cpu1) is
> this related to the cpufreq and related stuff ?
>
> It also says cannot dump. Device not defined or unavailable so I ca
Hi,
I just updated my 8.0-STABLE/amd64 today around 17h CEST, and it just
panics when I unplug my AC. The current process = 11 (idle: cpu1) is
this related to the cpufreq and related stuff ?
It also says cannot dump. Device not defined or unavailable so I can't
give you more infos now.
King reg
52 matches
Mail list logo