on 18/08/2011 02:15 Steven Hartland said the following:
> - Original Message - From: "Andriy Gapon"
>
>> Thanks to the debug that Steven provided and to the help that I received from
>> Kostik, I think that now I understand the basic mechanics of this panic, but,
>> unfortunately, not the
- Original Message -
From: "Andriy Gapon"
Thats interesting, are you using http as an example or is that something thats
been gleaned from the debugging of our output? I ask as there's only one process
running in each of our jails and thats a single java process.
It's from the debug d
Hi!
I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
[root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
2011 mox@current64:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
[root@current64 /usr/src]# patch < ~/nvi2-freebsd-2011-08-17.diff
[roo
on 18/08/2011 13:35 Steven Hartland said the following:
> - Original Message - From: "Andriy Gapon"
>>> Thats interesting, are you using http as an example or is that something
>>> thats
>>> been gleaned from the debugging of our output? I ask as there's only one
>>> process
>>> running
- Original Message -
From: "Andriy Gapon"
Probably I have mistakenly assumed that the 'prison' in prison_derefer() has
something to do with an actual jail, while it could have been just prison0 where
all non-jailed processes belong.
That makes sense as this particular panic was cause
on 18/08/2011 14:11 Andriy Gapon said the following:
> Probably I have mistakenly assumed that the 'prison' in prison_derefer() has
> something to do with an actual jail, while it could have been just prison0
> where
> all non-jailed processes belong.
So, indeed:
(kgdb) p $2->p_ucred->cr_prison
$
On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 15:15 -0700, Test Rat wrote:
> Have you tried the patch in misc/159666 ?
Committed to -current svn R 224978.
thanks for the patch!
Sean
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebs
Some latest hard drives have logical sectors of 512 byte when they
actually have 4k physical sectors. Here is the document describing what
to do in such case:
http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2011-01-01.freebsd-on-4k-sector-drives.html .
For UFS: newfs -U -f 4096 /dev/da0
For ZFS: gnop create -S 409
Em... I can't reproduce this. Can you post your make.conf and src.conf?
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:30 AM, timp wrote:
> Hi!
> I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
>
> [root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
> FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
> 2
on 17/08/2011 23:21 Andriy Gapon said the following:
It seems like everything starts with some kind of a race between terminating
processes in a jail and termination of the jail itself. This is where the
details are very thin so far. What we see is that a process (http) is in
exit(2) syscall, i
2011/8/18 Andriy Gapon :
> on 17/08/2011 23:21 Andriy Gapon said the following:
>>
>> It seems like everything starts with some kind of a race between
>> terminating
>> processes in a jail and termination of the jail itself. This is where the
>> details are very thin so far. What we see is that a
Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 01:09:32PM +0100, Matt Burke wrote:
> How does the build process know about the non-symlinked path anyway?
> I can't see where (or understand why) it uses "pwd -P"
Make(1)'s .OBJDIR is used:
{{{
.OBJDIR A path to the directory where the targets are built. At
timp writes:
> Hi!
> I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
>
> [root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
> FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
> 2011 mox@current64:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
>
> [root@current64 /usr/src]# patch < ~/nvi2-
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Test Rat wrote:
> timp writes:
>
>> Hi!
>> I just tried you patch on latest current with clang.
>>
>> [root@current64 /usr/src]# uname -a
>> FreeBSD current64 9.0-BETA1 FreeBSD 9.0-BETA1 #0: Thu Aug 18 03:56:45 MSK
>> 2011 mox@current64:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GE
14 matches
Mail list logo
