Re: posix message queues and multiple receivers

2013-12-05 Thread David Brownlee
On 3 December 2013 22:45, David Laight wrote: > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 01:32:44PM -0500, Mouse wrote: >> >> When serving a request takes nontrivial time, and multiple requests can >> usefully be in progress at once, it is useful - it typically improves >> performance - to have multiple workers se

suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Hi I am still trying to work aroud the spurious reboots I get on netbsd-6/i386 with PAE. It happens on different machines when the load rises, and -current/i386 is not affected. Unfortunately using a -current kernel is not an option just right now, because of kernel bugs. For a reason I have no

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Wolfgang Solfrank
Hi Emanuel, sorry for not being helpful with the other problems, but Unfortunately using a -current kernel is not an option just right now, because of kernel bugs. For a reason I have not yet tracked down, dovecot is broken (IPC between (pop|imap)-login and auth process is screwed), and sshd r

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 12:13:46PM +0100, Wolfgang Solfrank wrote: > The problem is a change in the semantics of local domain > socket addresses. (...) > Note that there are even programs within our own > distribution which trigger core dumps due to this change > (at least kdump does). Oh, yes,

re: posix message queues and multiple receivers

2013-12-05 Thread matthew green
> > Run a single nfsd and it all works much better. > > On that basis should the NetBSD default be changed from -n 4? i definitely would object to such a change. i see slowness from multiple clients when i run nfsd with just one thread. i've never seen the problem dsl has seen with a netbsd nf

re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread matthew green
> The problem is a change in the semantics of local domain > socket addresses. Previously, they had a fixed size, and the > path name contained within the address was therefor normally > '\0'-terminated. Now the address is the common socket address > part plus the pathname, where the terminating

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 11:20:16PM +1100, matthew green wrote: > breaking binary compat like this is really unacceptable. > can someone please file a PR about it. we should not have > to patch and rebuild apps! Attached is a patch that seems to solve the problem at mine. Dovecot works again and k

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > Hi > > I am still trying to work aroud the spurious reboots I get on > netbsd-6/i386 with PAE. It happens on different machines when the load > rises, and -current/i386 is not affected. > Can you try a kernel with DEBUG, DIAGNOSTIC and LOCKDEBUG (this one is pretty ex

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 02:12:19PM +, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > Can you try a kernel with DEBUG, DIAGNOSTIC and LOCKDEBUG (this one is > pretty expensive) options enabled? It still reboots without a panic. -- Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Wolfgang Solfrank
Hi, Attached is a patch that seems to solve the problem at mine. Dovecot works again and kdump does not dumps core anymore. Your patch doesn't look right, and is probably incomplete, too. For one thing, you append the trailing '\0' one byte beyond the end of the the now extended mbuf. In add

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:25:21PM +0100, Wolfgang Solfrank wrote: > For one thing, you append the trailing '\0' one byte beyond the > end of the the now extended mbuf. Atatched is a second attempt; > > In addition, there are other places where the additional byte > needs to be accounted for, e.g

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:10:07PM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 02:12:19PM +, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > Can you try a kernel with DEBUG, DIAGNOSTIC and LOCKDEBUG (this one is > > pretty expensive) options enabled? > > It still reboots without a panic. But

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 04:10:07PM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 02:12:19PM +, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > > > Can you try a kernel with DEBUG, DIAGNOSTIC and LOCKDEBUG (this one is > > > pretty expensive) options enabled? > > > > It

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Wolfgang Solfrank
Hi, In addition, there are other places where the additional byte needs to be accounted for, e.g. in makeun() within this file. Not sure whether there are others. There is already a +1 in makeun. *addrlen = nam->m_len + 1; Yes, that's what I was trying to hint at. Here the m_len doe

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Mouse
>> The problem is a change in the semantics of local domain socket >> addresses. Previously, they had a fixed size, and the path name >> contained within the address was therefor normally '\0'-terminated. >> Now the address is the common socket address part plus the pathname, >> where the terminat

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 12:13:26PM -0500, Mouse wrote: > > we should not have to patch and rebuild apps! > > Only buggy apps, apps that already needed patching and rebuilding and > NetBSD just formerly let get away with their incorrect assumptions. IMO there is no point to break backward compatib

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
matthew green wrote: > breaking binary compat like this is really unacceptable. > can someone please file a PR about it. we should not have > to patch and rebuild apps! I will look at it and propose a patch to have the path nul-terminated. -- Emmanuel Dreyfus http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz m...@n

Re: ~5 percent kernel performance loss in the last 3 weeks

2013-12-05 Thread David Holland
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:09:49PM +0100, Christoph Badura wrote: > > After updating my -current kernel from 6.99.24 to 6.99.27 so I could > > commit my ubsec(4) changes I noticed that under 6.99.27 I get between > > 3 and 8 percent less throughput on accelerated crypto ops. > > I was able to

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Mouse
>>> we should not have to patch and rebuild apps! >> Only buggy apps, apps that already needed patching and rebuilding >> and NetBSD just formerly let get away with their incorrect >> assumptions. > IMO there is no point to break backward compatibility just for the > sake of correctness. That's an

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Wolfgang Solfrank
Hi, That's an argument for doing this for COMPAT_* code. It's not an argument for doing it for non-compat programs. Indeed, I think it's actually better to break code depending on such incorrect assumptions, beacuse it makes it easier to find (and then fix) them. While in principle I agree w

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Mouse
> To the best of my knowledge, it was long unspecified whether the > terminating '\0' was part of the address or not. Even 1.4T's unix(4) says "the terminating NUL is not part of the address". It (like the 4.0.1 manpage) even emphasizes the "not". I no longer have anything older easily available

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:57:06PM +0100, Wolfgang Solfrank wrote: > Yes, that's what I was trying to hint at. Here the m_len > does include the terminating '\0' byte, so it should be > something like (untested): Attached is third version, which seems to work fine at mine -- Emmanuel Dreyfus m..

Re: suprious reboot on netbsd-6:i386 with PAE

2013-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > Can you try a kernel with DEBUG, DIAGNOSTIC and LOCKDEBUG (this one is > pretty expensive) options enabled? After dozens of silent reboots, I had a panic, but I suspect it is caused by filesystem corruption; dev = 0x0, block = 1717456, fs = / panic: blkfree: fre

1 new message

2013-12-05 Thread ANZ
Dear valued customer, We regret to inform you that access to your accounts has been temporarily susspended. This has been done to avoid a potential threat on your account (© Australia and New Zealand Banking Threat-sense ). The access can be restored anytime by donwloading and completing the