Re: Is FreeBSD a suitable choice for a MacBook?
>> I have an Apple MacBook with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (November >> 2007 edition, cf. the Wikipedia article for specifications), and I have >> been considering switching to one of the free UNIX clones for some time >> now. > > Why? Might I suggest: DRM, Vendor lock-in, $128 upgrade every 2 years, and crippled debugging tools. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: trying to track down UFS "dup alloc" message on iSCSI
Hey Andrew, can you instrument the IO code a bit? It's possible that the iscsi stack is returning an error that UFS isn't catching. Or it's possible that iscsi stack is failing to return an error and just dropping the data packet. That could mean that UFS is assuming that the write is going through, but isn't either because it's not catching the error, or that iscsi is lying to it. -Alfred * Andrew Snow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081002 22:28] wrote: > > > I am playing with an iSCSI device on FreeBSD client running UFS2 on the > device over a LAN. Everything works well until I reboot the iSCSI > server - the client pauses for a minute or so then continues working > after iSCSI server comes back. No I/O errors are reported. Everything > seems to work fine for a little while! > > But shortly afterwards, I get a panic with the message > > panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc > > > It seems related to the length of the delay the iSCSI device is paused - > restarting the iSCSI target daemon process doesn't cause the problem but > rebooting the whole target box does cause it. > > 1. Could this be related to the patch Matt Dillon created years ago > which I found here? > > http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/bugs/2005-01/msg00093.html > > > 2. Can anyone think of any other reason this might happen? I know I am > stretching UFS to the limits here, expecting it to pause and restart > after more than a minute of locked disk :-) However, since all I/O > eventually complete successfully and no errors are reported, I find it > suspicious. > > > Cheers > > - Andrew > > > ps. running latest iSCSI code 2.1 on latest 7-STABLE box. > > ___ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -- - Alfred Perlstein ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: fxp performance with POLLING
* Bartosz Stec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081003 07:23] wrote: > Hello again :) > > With POLLING enabled I experience about 10%-25% performance drop when > copying files over network. Tested with both SAMBA and NFS. Is it normal? > >FreeBSD 7.1-PRERELEASE #0: Sat Sep 6 01:52:12 CEST 2008 >fxp0: port 0xc800-0xc83f mem >0xe1021000-0xe1021fff irq 20 at device 8.0 on pci1 > ># ifconfig fxp0 >fxp0: flags=9843 >metric 0 mtu 1500 >options=8 >ether 00:20:ed:42:87:13 >inet 192.168.0.2 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255 >media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) >status: active > > BTW overall SAMBA performance still sucks on 7.1-pre as much as on > RELENG_5 ...:( - 7.5 MB/s peak. 7.5MB is 75% effeciency of a 100mbit card. Not amazing, but not "sucks". Where do you see faster performance? Between windows machines on the same hardware or linux server? -- - Alfred Perlstein ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Request for testing: ata(4) MFC
--On Saturday, October 04, 2008 19:38 +0400 "Andrey V. Elsukov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, All.
I prepared patch to make MFC of ata(4) driver into RELENG_7
before 7.1-RELEASE. Depending on results of the testing patch
will be commited or not (if some regressions will be detected).
So if you want or just can test it, please try and report here.
Installed and tested with no ill effects on an ASUS M2N-VM DVI board. Still
need to manually apply the attached patch, picked up on the list a while
ago, to have the built-in SATA controller detected and recognized as AHCI
capable.
Cheers,
Goran
Attachments:
lspci output of controller under test.
original patch for controller.
updated patch against tested patchset.
---
"There is hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags do not wave in a vacuum."
-- Arthur C. Clarke00:09.0 SATA controller [0106]: nVidia Corporation MCP67 AHCI Controller
[10de:0554] (rev a2) (prog-if 01 [AHCI 1.0])
Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Unknown device [1043:82b3]
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr-
Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B- DisINTx-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- SERR-
Index: src/sys/dev/ata/ata-chipset.c
===
RCS file: /ncvs/src/sys/dev/ata/ata-chipset.c,v
retrieving revision 1.225
diff -u -p -r1.225 ata-chipset.c
--- src/sys/dev/ata/ata-chipset.c 15 Aug 2008 10:55:11 - 1.225
+++ src/sys/dev/ata/ata-chipset.c 23 Sep 2008 05:06:28 -
@@ -3372,7 +3372,9 @@ ata_nvidia_ident(device_t dev)
{ ATA_NFORCE_MCP61_S3, 0, 0, NV4|NVQ, ATA_SA300, "nForce MCP61" },
{ ATA_NFORCE_MCP65,0, AMDNVIDIA, NVIDIA, ATA_UDMA6, "nForce MCP65" },
{ ATA_NFORCE_MCP67,0, AMDNVIDIA, NVIDIA, ATA_UDMA6, "nForce MCP67" },
+ { ATA_NFORCE_MCP67_A1, 0, 0, NVAHCI, ATA_SA300, "nForce MCP67" },
{ ATA_NFORCE_MCP73,0, AMDNVIDIA, NVIDIA, ATA_UDMA6, "nForce MCP73" },
+ { ATA_NFORCE_MCP73_A1, 0, 0, NVAHCI, ATA_SA300, "nForce MCP73" },
{ ATA_NFORCE_MCP77,0, AMDNVIDIA, NVIDIA, ATA_UDMA6, "nForce MCP77" },
{ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}} ;
@@ -3380,7 +3382,12 @@ ata_nvidia_ident(device_t dev)
return ENXIO;
ata_set_desc(dev);
-ctlr->chipinit = ata_nvidia_chipinit;
+
+if (ctlr->chip->cfg2 == NVAHCI)
+ ctlr->chipinit = ata_ahci_chipinit;
+else
+ ctlr->chipinit = ata_nvidia_chipinit;
+
return 0;
}
Index: src/sys/dev/ata/ata-pci.h
===
RCS file: /ncvs/src/sys/dev/ata/ata-pci.h,v
retrieving revision 1.89
diff -u -p -r1.89 ata-pci.h
--- src/sys/dev/ata/ata-pci.h 10 Jul 2008 21:36:53 - 1.89
+++ src/sys/dev/ata/ata-pci.h 23 Sep 2008 05:06:28 -
@@ -243,8 +243,10 @@ struct ata_connect_task {
#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP61_S2 0x03f610de
#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP61_S3 0x03f710de
#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP650x044810de
+#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP67_A1 0x055010de
#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP670x056010de
#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP730x056c10de
+#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP73_A1 0x07f810de
#define ATA_NFORCE_MCP770x075910de
#define ATA_PROMISE_ID 0x105a
@@ -450,6 +452,7 @@ struct ata_connect_task {
#define NVIDIA 0x0004
#define NV4 0x0010
#define NVQ 0x0020
+#define NVAHCI 0x0040
#define VIACLK 0x0100
#define VIABUG 0x0200
#define VIABAR 0x0400
ata_nvidia_ahci-20081004.diff
Description: Binary data
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Is FreeBSD a suitable choice for a MacBook?
> > You sound as if you just got the machine and haven't given MacOS X a chance. > Give MacOS X a chance. Download (if its not on your MacOS X install DVD) X > Code, and Apple X11. > X11 is barely usable under Leopard. Apps crash regularly and full-screen doesn't work. He may simply want to be able to boot in to FreeBSD as well. Cheers. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Request for testing: ata(4) MFC
On 5Oct, 2008, at 13:04 , Marius Strobl wrote: On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:38:09PM +0400, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: Hi, All. I prepared patch to make MFC of ata(4) driver into RELENG_7 before 7.1-RELEASE. Depending on results of the testing patch will be commited or not (if some regressions will be detected). So if you want or just can test it, please try and report here. One regression of the post-PM code is that support for some Promise controllers is broken in that probing drives causes a hang. In my case it's a FasTrak S150 TX4 with a PDC20319 but there are also other variants affected, see f.e.: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2008-May/ 085923.html I'm aware of the Promise problems and its on my TODO list, just havn't gotten around to it yet. When I have the current floating patch for splitting up ata-chipset.c in vendor specific files I'll have a go on that report (makes it lots easier to work with). -Søren ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Upgrading to 7.x : make check-old
On 10/5/08, Wolfgang Zenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is that list more or less expected? From what I can tell, it's pretty > > safe to now do a make delete-old-libs. Do you concur? > > > that depends on you having updated all ports/packages as well as the > base system. I think I used a tool that checks which shared libraries are > used by which program but can't remember how it was called; but anyway you > can simply use ldd on your binaries in /usr/local/* to check if any of > them still use one of the old libs. > I have used the devel/libcheck utility to check for missing libraries after upgrading the installed ports. Scot ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Upgrading to 7.x : make check-old
[forgot to send to list first time] Hi, * Scot Hetzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081005 13:52]: > On 10/5/08, Wolfgang Zenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Is that list more or less expected? From what I can tell, it's pretty >> > safe to now do a make delete-old-libs. Do you concur? >> that depends on you having updated all ports/packages as well as the >> base system. I think I used a tool that checks which shared libraries are >> used by which program but can't remember how it was called; but anyway you >> can simply use ldd on your binaries in /usr/local/* to check if any of >> them still use one of the old libs. > I have used the devel/libcheck utility to check for missing libraries > after upgrading the installed ports. I guess you mean the sysutils/libchk utility and that was the one I used. Wolfgang ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Upgrading to 7.x : make check-old
Hi, * Dan Langille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081004 00:18]: > Folks: > I have upgraded a server from 6.3 to 7.0. That went rather smoothly. I > have a question about removing old libraries via make delete-old. > Given the list of old libraries shown at the end of this URL: > http://www.freebsddiary.org/upgrade-6.3-to-7.0.php > Is that list more or less expected? From what I can tell, it's pretty > safe to now do a make delete-old-libs. Do you concur? that depends on you having updated all ports/packages as well as the base system. I think I used a tool that checks which shared libraries are used by which program but can't remember how it was called; but anyway you can simply use ldd on your binaries in /usr/local/* to check if any of them still use one of the old libs. Wolfgang ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Is FreeBSD a suitable choice for a MacBook?
Thank you for your reply, David. You seem to be answering a question I did not ask, but allow me to respond briefly in any case: I have been using the operating system since January, and I am full aware of its line of inheritance as well as the UNIX 03 certification, and I have no major beef with it for everyday purposes. However, for all its ease of use and outstanding graphical user interface, I still find that its crossbred nature makes for a somewhat untidy system when dealing with nitty-gritty UNIX tasks such as enabling and configuring the firewall, configuring the system for maximum security (the default file permissions allow everyone to watch what's inside everyone else's home directories, for instance), installing an application by hand and so on. I also much prefer the free software movement and its principles to Apple and its "principles". Now, could someone answer my original question? Regards ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Request for testing: ata(4) MFC
On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:38:09PM +0400, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: > Hi, All. > > I prepared patch to make MFC of ata(4) driver into RELENG_7 > before 7.1-RELEASE. Depending on results of the testing patch > will be commited or not (if some regressions will be detected). > So if you want or just can test it, please try and report here. One regression of the post-PM code is that support for some Promise controllers is broken in that probing drives causes a hang. In my case it's a FasTrak S150 TX4 with a PDC20319 but there are also other variants affected, see f.e.: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2008-May/085923.html Marius ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Is FreeBSD a suitable choice for a MacBook?
On 4 Oct 2008, at 21:00, Eirik Wixøe Svela wrote: I have an Apple MacBook with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (November 2007 edition, cf. the Wikipedia article for specifications), and I have been considering switching to one of the free UNIX clones for some time now. I understand that Ubuntu GNU/Linux is supposed to work well on this kind of machine, but I would rather use some variant of BSD if that is a viable alternative. Only used FreeBSD (and several Linux variations and Windows varieties) on my Macbook Pro, but none of these as the boot operating system. All of these do however run as expected in a virtual environment like Parallels. I would therefore like to ask you whether anyone here has any experience with FreeBSD, either 7.0-RELEASE or any other version, that they would like to share so I might know what to expect if I choose to go through with this. I have some time on my hands the next couple of weeks, so I am prepared to spend some days tweaking things to work if it is worth the effort, but if it isn't, I might as well take Ubuntu for a spin or do a clean install of Mac OS X. Best regards Eirik W. Svela OpenPGP key ID 0x46DCA4C4 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED] " Ciao, Hans. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Is FreeBSD a suitable choice for a MacBook?
Eirik Wixøe Svela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I have an Apple MacBook with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (November > 2007 edition, cf. the Wikipedia article for specifications), and I have > been considering switching to one of the free UNIX clones for some time > now. I understand that Ubuntu GNU/Linux is supposed to work well on this > kind of machine, but I would rather use some variant of BSD if that is a > viable alternative. I have a MacBook running FreeBSD. IIRC I bought it in January 2008 so it's probably the same model as yours. > I would therefore like to ask you whether anyone here has any experience > with FreeBSD, either 7.0-RELEASE or any other version, that they would > like to share so I might know what to expect if I choose to go through > with this. I have some time on my hands the next couple of weeks, so I > am prepared to spend some days tweaking things to work if it is worth > the effort, but if it isn't, I might as well take Ubuntu for a spin or > do a clean install of Mac OS X. I have made a few notes here: http://borderworlds.dk/notes/freebsd-macbook.html I just used boot camp and did a pretty standard install. I would recommend installing a 7.1-BETA release to have the wired ethernet working from the beginning. -- Christian Laursen ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Upgrading to 7.x : make check-old
On 10/5/08, Wolfgang Zenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [forgot to send to list first time] > > > Hi, > > * Scot Hetzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081005 13:52]: > > On 10/5/08, Wolfgang Zenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Is that list more or less expected? From what I can tell, it's pretty > >> > safe to now do a make delete-old-libs. Do you concur? > > >> that depends on you having updated all ports/packages as well as the > >> base system. I think I used a tool that checks which shared libraries are > >> used by which program but can't remember how it was called; but anyway > you > >> can simply use ldd on your binaries in /usr/local/* to check if any of > >> them still use one of the old libs. > > > I have used the devel/libcheck utility to check for missing libraries > > after upgrading the installed ports. > > I guess you mean the sysutils/libchk utility and that was the one I used. > sysutils/libchk is the one I had used. Scot ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Upgrading to 7.x : make check-old
Wolfgang Zenker wrote: Hi, * Dan Langille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [081004 00:18]: Folks: I have upgraded a server from 6.3 to 7.0. That went rather smoothly. I have a question about removing old libraries via make delete-old. Given the list of old libraries shown at the end of this URL: http://www.freebsddiary.org/upgrade-6.3-to-7.0.php Is that list more or less expected? From what I can tell, it's pretty safe to now do a make delete-old-libs. Do you concur? that depends on you having updated all ports/packages as well as the base system. I did that. I made sure of that. I think I used a tool that checks which shared libraries are used by which program but can't remember how it was called; but anyway you can simply use ldd on your binaries in /usr/local/* to check if any of them still use one of the old libs. Is this correct: Worst case: some ports stop running? If so, I can live with that. :o Thank you. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Upgrading to 7.x : make check-old
Scot Hetzel wrote: On 10/5/08, Wolfgang Zenker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is that list more or less expected? From what I can tell, it's pretty > safe to now do a make delete-old-libs. Do you concur? that depends on you having updated all ports/packages as well as the base system. I think I used a tool that checks which shared libraries are used by which program but can't remember how it was called; but anyway you can simply use ldd on your binaries in /usr/local/* to check if any of them still use one of the old libs. I have used the devel/libcheck utility to check for missing libraries after upgrading the installed ports. Noted. Did that. I may compare that to the ldd output. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: bad NFS/UDP performance
On Sat, 4 Oct 2008, Danny Braniss wrote: at the moment, the best I can do is run it on a different hardware that has if_em, the results are in ftp://ftp.cs.huji.ac.il/users/danny/lock.prof/7.1-1000.em the benchmark ran better with the Intel NIC, averaged UDP 54MB/s, TCP 53MB/s (I get the same numbers with an older kernel). Dear Danny: Unfortunately, I was left slightly unclear on the comparison you are making above. Could you confirm whether or not, with if_em, you see a performance regression using UDP NFS between 7.0-RELEASE and the most recent 7.1-STABLE, and if you do, whether or not the RLOCK->WLOCK change has any effect on performance? It would be nice to know on the same hardware but at least with different hardware we get a sense of whether or not this might affect other systems or whether it's limited to a narrower set of configurations. Thanks, Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Request for testing: ata(4) MFC
Jeremy Chadwick wrote: Also, does your patch include any fixes (intentional or inadvertent) for Intel MatrixRAID? This has been a sore spot for FreeBSD for quite some time, and I'm curious to know if that has been fixed. There is only one fix for Intel Matrix RAID: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/121899 P.S. -- Mandatory plug: don't forget about kern/127717 :-) First of it should be commited into HEAD.. -- WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Request for testing: ata(4) MFC
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 09:03:20AM +0400, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote: > Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> Also, does your patch include any fixes (intentional or inadvertent) for >> Intel MatrixRAID? This has been a sore spot for FreeBSD for quite >> some time, and I'm curious to know if that has been fixed. > > There is only one fix for Intel Matrix RAID: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/121899 Ahh, yeah, I've seen that one as well. I'll apply the patch and let you know if the behaviour documented in the PR happens. >> P.S. -- Mandatory plug: don't forget about kern/127717 :-) > > First of it should be commited into HEAD.. Cool, thanks! -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
