I'm going afk for a couple days, all I've got so far from moused
is-
/dev/psm0 ps/2 sysmouse generic
moused: proto params: f8 80 00 00 8 00 ff
The laptop in question is Thinkpad T400.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/moused-touchpad-issue-after-updating-
Namely, the touchpad ceased to simulate mouse buttons (doesn't respond
to tapping). Any pointers? It must be recent, source from few days ago
worked ok.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.x6.nabble.com/moused-touchpad-issue-after-updating-to-FreeBSD-11-0-STABLE-0-r307755-am
On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 20:47:20 +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
Again, trouble quoting your message properly, so quotes by hand ..
> I set the flag, then tried to change the slice from 1 to 2.
> Result:
[..]
> root@hd45:~ # boot0cfg -v mirror/m0
> # flag start chs type end chs
Next
Oct 21 22:06:26 ns syslogd: kernel boot file is /boot/kernel/kernel
Oct 21 22:06:26 ns kernel: panic: sbsndptr: sockbuf 0xf80201038518 and mbuf
0xf802820a1200 clashing
Oct 21 22:06:26 ns kernel: cpuid = 3
Oct 21 22:06:26 ns kernel: KDB: stack backtrace:
Oct 21 22:06:26 ns kernel: #0
Hi, friendly community.
I present to you my collection.
I have :
//===//
System Information
Manufacturer: Supermicro
Product Name: X10SLH-F/X10SLM+-F
//===//
pciconf -lv
hostb0
Hi, Warner,
> Am 21.10.2016 um 20:25 schrieb Warner Losh :
> Can you give us the strace output?
amd64 - no strace. I need a hand here, what precisely do I need to enter?
> It looks like it is reading the current blocks, setting the options,
> and then writing it back to the device. If the write
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
>> Am 21.10.2016 um 16:41 schrieb Warner Losh :
>> Any chance you can migrate to using gpart? Is boot0cfg still
>> referenced in NanoBSD somewhere?
>
> Not in NanoBSD but how would you configure boot0's default
> slice with gp
Hi, all,
> Am 21.10.2016 um 16:41 schrieb Warner Losh :
> Any chance you can migrate to using gpart? Is boot0cfg still
> referenced in NanoBSD somewhere?
Not in NanoBSD but how would you configure boot0's default
slice with gpart? It doesn't pay attention to the "active" flag.
See Miroslav's mail
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Pete French
wrote:
> Not forgotten, just under the impression that ZFS shrinks directories
> unlike good old UFS. Apparenrly not,
>
Someone offhandedly mentioned this earlier (it's apparently intended for
the future sometime). I at least hope they do something s
Ian Smith wrote on 2016/10/21 16:43:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:39:57 +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> we are repeatedly bitten by the following misbehaviour of boot0cfg:
>
> root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -s 1 mirror/m0
> root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -v mirror/m0
> #
Hello all,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 08:41:33AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > Hi, all,
> >
> > we are repeatedly bitten by the following misbehaviour of boot0cfg:
> >
> > root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -s 1 mirror/m0
> > root@hd45:/usr/l
On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:39:57 +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> we are repeatedly bitten by the following misbehaviour of boot0cfg:
>
> root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -s 1 mirror/m0
> root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -v mirror/m0
> # flag start chs type end chs
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> we are repeatedly bitten by the following misbehaviour of boot0cfg:
>
> root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -s 1 mirror/m0
> root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -v mirror/m0
> # flag start chs type end chs offset
On 2016/10/21 13:47, Pete French wrote:
>> In bad case metadata of every file will be placed in random place of disk.
>> ls need access to metadata of every file before start of output listing.
>
> Umm, are we not talkong abut an issue where the directoyr no longer contains
> any files. It used to
> Oh, my goodness, how far afield nonsense has gotten! Have all the
> good folks posting in this thread forgotten how directory blocks are
> allocated in UNIX?
Not forgotten, just under the impression that ZFS shrinks directories
unlike good old UFS. Apparenrly not, and yes, if thats true th
On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:51:36 +0500 "Eugene M. Zheganin"
wrote:
>On 21.10.2016 15:20, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>>
>> ZFS prefetch affect performance dpeneds of workload (independed of RAM
>> size): for some workloads wins, for some workloads lose (for my
>> workload prefetch is lose and manu
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 01:47:08PM +0100, Pete French wrote:
> > In bad case metadata of every file will be placed in random place of disk.
> > ls need access to metadata of every file before start of output listing.
>
> Umm, are we not talkong abut an issue where the directoyr no longer contains
> In bad case metadata of every file will be placed in random place of disk.
> ls need access to metadata of every file before start of output listing.
Umm, are we not talkong abut an issue where the directoyr no longer contains
any files. It used to have lots, now it has none.
> I.e. in bad case
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:14:26AM +0200, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> I've tried this way, but altough I'm quite proficient with [k]gdb I tend to
> get lost in FreeBSD's kernel's source code, which, unfortunately, I'm not
> familiar with.
>
> BTW, I had read that book years ago; I searched for it no
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 04:51:36PM +0500, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On 21.10.2016 15:20, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> >
> > ZFS prefetch affect performance dpeneds of workload (independed of RAM
> > size): for some workloads wins, for some workloads lose (for my
> > workload prefetch is
Hi, all,
we are repeatedly bitten by the following misbehaviour of boot0cfg:
root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -s 1 mirror/m0
root@hd45:/usr/local # boot0cfg -v mirror/m0
# flag start chs type end chs offset size
1 0x80 1: 0: 1 0xa5 1022:254:6316065
Hi.
On 21.10.2016 15:20, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
ZFS prefetch affect performance dpeneds of workload (independed of RAM
size): for some workloads wins, for some workloads lose (for my
workload prefetch is lose and manualy disabled with 128GB RAM).
Anyway, this system have only 24MB in ARC by
Instead of the guesswork and black magic, you could try to use tools to analyze
the problem. E.g., determine if the delay is because a CPU does a lot of work
or it is because of waiting. Find the bottleneck, etc.
pmcstat, dtrace are your friends :-)
--
Andriy Gapon
https://jenkins.FreeBSD.org/job/FreeBSD_stable_10/437/
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:02:57AM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote:
> > Mem: 21M Active, 646M Inact, 931M Wired, 2311M Free
> > ARC: 73M Total, 3396K MFU, 21M MRU, 545K Anon, 1292K Header, 47M Other
> > Swap: 4096M Total, 4096M Free
> >
> > PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME
On 21/10/2016 10:04, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
Hi.
On 21.10.2016 9:22, Steven Hartland wrote:
On 21/10/2016 04:52, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
Hi.
On 20.10.2016 21:17, Steven Hartland wrote:
Do you have atime enabled for the relevant volume?
I do.
If so disable it and see if that helps:
zfs
Hi.
On 21.10.2016 9:22, Steven Hartland wrote:
On 21/10/2016 04:52, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote:
Hi.
On 20.10.2016 21:17, Steven Hartland wrote:
Do you have atime enabled for the relevant volume?
I do.
If so disable it and see if that helps:
zfs set atime=off
Nah, it doesn't help at all.
A
On 10/20/16 22:12, Peter wrote:
Hello.
Basically You have two options: A) fire up kgdb, go into the code and
try and understand what exactly is happening. This depends
if You have clue enough to go that way; I found "man 4 gdb" and
especially the "Debugging Kernel Problems" pdf by Greg Lehey
28 matches
Mail list logo
