On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 02:51:59PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 05-Feb-01 Crist J. Clark wrote:
> > I don't recall reports of trouble with recent CURRENT, but my CVSup
> > from yesterday afternoon is panicing. Before I try too debug this, has
> > anyone been getting these or knows what I mig
On Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:34:39 +1100, "Chris Knight" wrote:
> Since the new md was introduced, it is not possible to build a -current
> snapshot on a -stable box. Are there any plans to MFC this soon?
Woah, what's the problem? This sounds like something that should be
fixed, not covered up with
As I already wrote in a prior statement, Alfred Perlstein and
I ported TI_RPC to FreeBSD. It compiles with recent CURRENT.
http://www.attic.ch/patches/rpc.diff_01152001-2.sh.tgz
All you have to do is to start rpc.diff_01152001-2.sh in the
source tree and make a buildworld and then run mergemast
Howdy,
> -Original Message-
> From: Sheldon Hearn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 February 2001 20:38
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: md, current and stable
>
>
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:34:39 +1100, "Chris Knight" wrote:
>
>
In message <004a01c09026$ec0261f0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chris Knight" writes:
>Howdy,
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sheldon Hearn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 February 2001 20:38
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: md, cu
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 08:46:42PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 06-Feb-01 Andrea Campi wrote:
> > Sorry to bother everybody, but did anybody note from my panic trace,
> > that instruction pointer is 0xdeadc0de? Isn't that bad? :-p
>
> That means it is free'd memory. One cause might be some
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 03:43:33PM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: "Kenneth D. Merry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:00:41 -0700
> > I think we already have the most important functionality from the od(4)
> > driver in the da and cd drivers. If there are any features that
Hi,
I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
of minutes; on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to boot,
and disk I/O is through the roof.
> Problem: I can't do anything at db> prompt? Backtrace is doing nothing except
> triggering a new register dump (another fault I assume).
New kernel, new panic, new info:
db> witness_list
"Giant" (0xc0279be0) locked at ../../i386/isa/ithread.c:191
db> show registers
cs 0x8
From: Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:30:30 +0100
> > Though I have not tried `da' lately, if you don't insert a medium in
> > the drive at the time of CAM rescan bus, `da' tries to get the
> > geometry by XPT_CALC_GEOMETRY then panics with divided by zero in most
> > SCS
The line where I was having the trap is still within cpu_switch (line
236 of swtch.s).
I added WITNESS and INVARIANTS to my kernel and I get a new panic.
This time I see:
kernel trap 12 with interrupts disabled
panic: mutex sched lock recursed at ../../kern/kern_synch.c:918
panic()
_mtx_asser
Josef Karthauser wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
>
> A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
> of minutes; on today's kernel it takes 5 or 10 minutes to
Could someone close PR misc/{24122,15471}?
PR misc/24122 is no longer relevent.
I doubt anyone will every apply the patches in PR misc/15471 to
older versions of FreeBSD.
--
Steve
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Martin Cracauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>would you please have a look at the following sh fix? My brain is a
>bit rusty and maybe I overlook a drawback.
>
>When a child is receiving SIGSTOP, eval continues with the next
>command. While that is correct for the interactive case (Control-Z
>and
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
Use of cmpxchg and possibly other SMP pessimizations.
> A couple of weeks ago I could boot win2000 under vmware2 in a matter
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 02:40:27AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > Could someone please hit me with a clue-bat :)
>
> Read your freebsd-emulation mail :-).
/me wanders off to subscribe to freebsd-emulation.
Thanks Bruce.
Joe
PGP signature
Bruce Evans wrote:
>
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:
>
> > I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> > the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
>
> Use of cmpxchg and possibly other SMP pessimizations.
>
> > A couple of weeks ago I could
On 06-Feb-01 Crist J. Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 02:51:59PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>> On 05-Feb-01 Crist J. Clark wrote:
>> > I don't recall reports of trouble with recent CURRENT, but my CVSup
>> > from yesterday afternoon is panicing. Before I try too debug this, has
>> > an
On 06-Feb-01 Jim Bloom wrote:
> The line where I was having the trap is still within cpu_switch (line
> 236 of swtch.s).
>
> I added WITNESS and INVARIANTS to my kernel and I get a new panic.
> This time I see:
>
> kernel trap 12 with interrupts disabled
> panic: mutex sched lock recursed at
On 06-Feb-01 Andrea Campi wrote:
>> Problem: I can't do anything at db> prompt? Backtrace is doing nothing
>> except
>> triggering a new register dump (another fault I assume).
>
> New kernel, new panic, new info:
>
> db> witness_list
> "Giant" (0xc0279be0) locked at ../../i386/isa/ithr
On 06-Feb-01 Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:34:39 +1100, "Chris Knight" wrote:
>
>> Since the new md was introduced, it is not possible to build a -current
>> snapshot on a -stable box. Are there any plans to MFC this soon?
>
> Woah, what's the problem? This sounds like so
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Randell Jesup wrote:
> Martin Cracauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >would you please have a look at the following sh fix? My brain is a
> >bit rusty and maybe I overlook a drawback.
> >
> >When a child is receiving SIGSTOP, eval continues with the next
> >command. While
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> If you really want to background one process from /etc/rc, you would
> still do that by writing a wrapped that catches SIGINT and send
^^^ ^
wrapper shellscri
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Andrea Campi writes:
: Problem: I can't do anything at db> prompt? Backtrace is doing nothing except
: triggering a new register dump (another fault I assume).
I'm having all kinds of issues with -current and pccards. OLDCARD
hangs solid when I remove a card. Newc
Here are the registers (subject to typing errors):
cs 0xc2fb0008
ds 0xa10
es0x10
fs0x18
ss0x10
eax 0x12
ecx 0x20
edx 0xc00b8f00
ebx0x2
esp 0xc2fbee1c
ebp 0xc2fbee28
esi 0x100
edi 0xc0290990
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Releases are bad enough as is w/o having to add in a multitude of
> hacks so that one can roll a 5.0 release on a 2.2.x box, etc.
Sure, but allowing 4.x users to do a source upgrade to 5.0 makes the
upgrade path much more flexible. There's a big differe
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nat Lanza writes:
>John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Releases are bad enough as is w/o having to add in a multitude of
>> hacks so that one can roll a 5.0 release on a 2.2.x box, etc.
>
>Sure, but allowing 4.x users to do a source upgrade to 5.0 makes th
Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You don't need "make release" to do a source upgrade from 4.x to 5.x...
You're right. Whoops.
I can still see it being useful in some cases, though, and as long as
the changes necessary to support it aren't too ugly it might be
worthwhile.
--nat
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nat Lanza writes:
>Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You don't need "make release" to do a source upgrade from 4.x to 5.x...
>
>You're right. Whoops.
>
>I can still see it being useful in some cases, though, and as long as
>the changes necessary to
Hi,
I tried to install a snapshot of -current on my "new" test box. The
hardware used for the box should be OK, I've managed to boot it with
a recent snapshot of RELENG_4.
-current is another matter. I've tried to install 20010131 and 20001204
and both die with a "Fatal Trap 18: integer divide fa
On 06-Feb-01 Jim Bloom wrote:
> Here are the registers (subject to typing errors):
>
> cs0xc2fb0008
> ds 0xa10
> es 0x10
> fs 0x18
> ss 0x10
> eax 0x12
> ecx 0x20
> edx 0xc00b8f00
> ebx 0x2
> esp 0xc2fbee1c
> ebp 0xc2fbee28
>
Which kernel do you want me to try this with? I have tried two
different kernels with two different errors. (Both have been sent at
different times in the past couple days.) The registers listed here
from the second kernel (with WITNESS, INVARIANTS, INVARIANT_SUPPORT,
MUTEX_DEBUG). As such the
> > Besides the obvious need to fix this one problem, shouldn't we
> > ASSERT ih->ih_handler != NULL before calling it?
>
> It isn't null in this case, it is 0xdeadc0de. Can you try a pre-preemption
> kernel and see if that fixes it?
*BLUSH* Of course ehehe ;-)
Ok, I will. Can you give me a da
On 06-Feb-01 Jim Bloom wrote:
> Which kernel do you want me to try this with? I have tried two
> different kernels with two different errors. (Both have been sent at
> different times in the past couple days.) The registers listed here
> from the second kernel (with WITNESS, INVARIANTS, INVARI
On 06-Feb-01 Andrea Campi wrote:
>> > Besides the obvious need to fix this one problem, shouldn't we
>> > ASSERT ih->ih_handler != NULL before calling it?
>>
>> It isn't null in this case, it is 0xdeadc0de. Can you try a pre-preemption
>> kernel and see if that fixes it?
>
> *BLUSH* Of course
> dev.lan.Awfulhak.org kernel log messages:
> > microuptime() went backwards (18415.166882 -> 18415.158249)
> > microuptime() went backwards (18490.192910 -> 18490.187579)
> > microuptime() went backwards (19572.644000 -> 19572.638237)
> > microuptime() went backwards (19878.637972 -> 19878.637330
> Bruce Evans wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> >
> > > I'm wondering what's changed recently to cause vmware2 running on
> > > the linuxemu to lose a lot of performance with disk I/O.
> >
> > Use of cmpxchg and possibly other SMP pessimizations.
> >
> > > A couple o
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 11:02:32AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
[snip]
> ARGH. The trap code is breaking this.
[snip]
> Just comment out that enable_intr() and please try again. This should give you
> a stack trace where the actual bug is. Thanks.
Done. And the winner is... (see attachment,
John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 06-Feb-01 Jim Bloom wrote:
> > Which kernel do you want me to try this with? I have tried two
> > different kernels with two different errors. (Both have been sent at
> > different times in the past couple days.) The registers listed here
> > from the second kernel (
On 07-Feb-01 Crist J. Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 11:02:32AM -0800, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> ARGH. The trap code is breaking this.
>
> [snip]
>
>> Just comment out that enable_intr() and please try again. This should give
>> you
>> a stack trace where the actual bug is
On 07-Feb-01 Jim Bloom wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>> On 06-Feb-01 Jim Bloom wrote:
>> > Which kernel do you want me to try this with? I have tried two
>> > different kernels with two different errors. (Both have been sent at
>> > different times in the past couple days.) The registers li
I have a world and kernel from 4 Feb 01. I tried listing the
contents in my mounted MS-DOS slice via "ls /msdos" as a normal
users, but got a permission denied message (which I've never
received before). So, a quick check on the directory permissions
shows:
d---w- 1 root 493arch 4096
On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Steve Kargl wrote:
> I have a world and kernel from 4 Feb 01. I tried listing the
> contents in my mounted MS-DOS slice via "ls /msdos" as a normal
> users, but got a permission denied message (which I've never
> received before). So, a quick check on the directory permissio
Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> >
> > d---w- 1 root 493arch 4096 Jan 1 1980 msdos/
> >
> > The source in src/sbin/mount_msdos has changed in a long time,
not
> > so is this a side effect of using DEVFS?
>
The Sojourn Project is a civil rights education project that takes
high school students from around the nation to historical civil rights landmarks
throughout the South. From time to time, we use this newsletter to publicize our
program and encourage involvement from the African-American com
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 12:34:18AM +0100, Farid Hajji wrote:
> I'm also seing this as of CURRENT-2001-01-27 and later:
> pcm1: hwptr went backwards 36 -> 0
> pcm1: hwptr went backwards 40 -> 16
> pcm1: hwptr went backwards 2084 -> 2048
> pcm1: hwptr went backwards 2092 -> 2064
These have existed
I receive ctm-src current by e-mail, which I retrive using netscape.
I save message as plain text then I try uudecode and I alvays get no begin
line I tryed to edit file but I'm not able to get it work.
Regards,
Rasa
P.S.
I know that this question doesn,t belong here but I did not get answer fo
47 matches
Mail list logo
