On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 02:00:30PM +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
> On 25 November 2012 10:10, wrote:
> > Alexander Motin wrote:
> >
> >> On 25.11.2012 01:43, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> > I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
> >>
> >> It is tunable. AFAIR that is it:
>
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 05:20:52PM +1100, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 11:33:21 +0100, Lars Engels wrote:
> > Am 23.11.2012 05:50, schrieb Ian Smith:
> > > On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:20:52 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> [..]
> > > > >> Also, isn't the entire verbose boot captured in /var/r
On 25 November 2012 10:10, wrote:
> Alexander Motin wrote:
>
>> On 25.11.2012 01:43, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> > I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
>>
>> It is tunable. AFAIR that is it:
>> kern.msgbufsize="65536" # Set size of kernel message buffer
>
> Yep. Tha
on 25/11/2012 02:08 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> On 25-11-2012 0:43, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
>
> That would help,
> especially if we can get it in the beastie bootmenu options...
Eh? I thought I already told about the t
Alexander Motin wrote:
> On 25.11.2012 01:43, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
>
> It is tunable. AFAIR that is it:
> kern.msgbufsize="65536" # Set size of kernel message buffer
Yep. That tunable is available in 8.2 (not 8.1), and I
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 11:33:21 +0100, Lars Engels wrote:
> Am 23.11.2012 05:50, schrieb Ian Smith:
> > On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:20:52 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
[..]
> > > >> Also, isn't the entire verbose boot captured in /var/run/dmesg?
> > > >
> > > > Only if the message buffer hasn't overf
On 25.11.2012 01:43, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
It is tunable. AFAIR that is it:
kern.msgbufsize="65536" # Set size of kernel message buffer
--
Alexander Motin
___
freebsd-stable@freeb
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:20:52 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Gary Palmer wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd
> wro
On 25-11-2012 0:43, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
That would help,
especially if we can get it in the beastie bootmenu options...
--WjW
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.f
I'm surprised it's not tunable via a kenv variable at boottime..
Adrian
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
On 23-11-2012 1:20, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Gary Palmer wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Neither ICH,
Am 23.11.2012 05:50, schrieb Ian Smith:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:20:52 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Gary Palmer
wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd
wrote:
> >> > On 22
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:20:52 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Gary Palmer wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >> > On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Gary Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> > On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
>> >
>> >> Neither ICH, nor any other driver I know have amount of i
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
> >
> >> Neither ICH, nor any other driver I know have amount of information
> >> comparable to what HDA hardware provides. S
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
>
>> Neither ICH, nor any other driver I know have amount of information
>> comparable to what HDA hardware provides. So the analogy is not good.
>> Respecting that most CODECs have no publish
On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin wrote:
> Neither ICH, nor any other driver I know have amount of information
> comparable to what HDA hardware provides. So the analogy is not good.
> Respecting that most CODECs have no published datasheets, that information
> is the only input for debu
On 22.11.2012 12:53, Ian Smith wrote:
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 23:12:17 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 21 November 2012 20:16, Ian Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
[..]
> > T61_dmesg.boot.10.works (file 1 of 2) lines 1813-1861/1861 byte
82415/82415
>
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 23:12:17 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 21 November 2012 20:16, Ian Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
[..]
> > T61_dmesg.boot.10.works (file 1 of 2) lines 1813-1861/1861 byte 82415/82415
> >
> > Cutting just the hdaa0, pcm0 and pcm1
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:12:17 +0100, Adrian Chadd
wrote:
On 21 November 2012 20:16, Ian Smith wrote:
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could pos
On 21 November 2012 20:16, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> > controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
> > go wrong.'
> >
> > Just bump the default ker
Dearest people,
I'm trying to get FreeBSD (back) into a couple orders of magnitude
more devices than you're thinking about.
When we talk about "the masses", let's keep in mind that we have
different ideas of what "the masses" are.
I'm trying to keep all of them in mind, rather than just the subs
On 22/11/2012, at 14:46, Ian Smith wrote:
> Dumping all nodes and channels is incredibly useful for folks needing to
> rewire something to get various jacks working and such, but I'd argue is
> way overkill for a 'normal' verbose boot. See acpi(4) for examples of
> selectively logging ACPI_DE
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:08:42 -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
> go wrong.'
>
> Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it
> hard-coded lik
+1 (RAM is neither free nor abundant.)
Increasing the default buffers, stack or heap use, should be carefully
considered. There was a discussion about providing guidance/examples for
loader.conf and sysctl.conf for various anticipated uses: firewall,
workstation, servers, routers whether single/
On 2012-11-21 21:08, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> .. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
> controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
> go wrong.'
>
> Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it
> hard-coded like that. Us embedded p
.. because some of us like kernel behaviour to be predictable and
controllable, rather than 'just be dynamic here, what could possibly
go wrong.'
Just bump the default kernel buffer size up to 64k and leave it
hard-coded like that. Us embedded people can drop that down to
something smaller.
There
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 19:41:42 +0100, Torfinn Ingolfsen
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:25:22 +0100
Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
Why bother...
Because FreeBSD also runs on hardware with minimal memory?
yes, but defaults should be for the masses and it is tunable for the rest
Because FreeBSD
On 21 November 2012 09:25, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
> Why bother...
> Memory is so cheap these days. We're talking about 64Kb being "wasted".
> On average I would assume that there is more than this wasted in odd
> bits and pieces in the kernel.
.. and some of us are actively trying to trim th
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:25:22 +0100
Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>
> Why bother...
Because FreeBSD also runs on hardware with minimal memory?
Because FreeBSD is a stable, sane operating system and we want to keep it that
way?
Because it breaks POLA?
Because it make developers act sloppy?
I'm sor
On 2012-11-21 18:09, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:08:12 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> > > You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> > > if bootverbose is true.
> >
> > This sounds /potentially/
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:08:12 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> > You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> > if bootverbose is true.
>
> This sounds /potentially/ neat.
>
> > The sound drivers now spit out so m
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 06:08:12PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> > You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> > if bootverbose is true.
>
> This sounds /potentially/ neat.
I do not want the bootverbose knob suddentl
on 21/11/2012 18:01 Ian Lepore said the following:
> You know what would be great? Have this value auto-tune itself upwards
> if bootverbose is true.
This sounds /potentially/ neat.
> The sound drivers now spit out so much stuff
> with bootverbose true that you need like a 128k buffer to see the
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 16:51 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
> On 2012-11-21 16:08, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 21/11/2012 15:20 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> >> On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >>> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen
> >>> wrote:
> Proba
On 2012-11-21 16:08, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 21/11/2012 15:20 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
>> On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
I know there used to be
on 21/11/2012 15:20 Willem Jan Withagen said the following:
> On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>>> Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
>>> I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
>>> But I can n
On 2012-11-21 11:14, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>> Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
>> I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
>> But I can not find it with the setting in NOTES or any other place I
>> looke
On 2012-Nov-21 10:57:49 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
>Probably because the kernelbuffer for it is too small.
>I know there used to be a kernel option to increase it.
>But I can not find it with the setting in NOTES or any other place I
>looked
# Size of the kernel message buffer. Should
39 matches
Mail list logo
