On 14 July 2010 18:14, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> In a machine installed yesterday, 8.1-PRERELEASE doesn't
> seem to detect the number of CPU packages vs. cores per
> package correctly:
>
> | FreeBSD 8.1-PRERELEASE-20100713 #0: Tue Jul 13 19:51:18 UTC 2010
> | [...]
> | CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> Could you please try to do the following?
> 1. Fetch topo-12212009.tar from the top of this page:
> http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-64-architecture-processor-topology-enumeration/
> 2. Untar it and apply this patch to the code:
> http://people.freebsd.org/
on 15/07/2010 14:58 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > Could you please try to do the following?
> > 1. Fetch topo-12212009.tar from the top of this page:
> >
> http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-64-architecture-processor-topology-enumeration/
> > 2. Untar
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 15/07/2010 14:58 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > > Could you please try to do the following?
> > > 1. Fetch topo-12212009.tar from the top of this page:
> > > http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-64-architecture-processor-topolo
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 15/07/2010 14:58 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > > Could you please try to do the following?
> > > 1. Fetch topo-12212009.tar from the top of this page:
> > > http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-64-architecture-processor-topolo
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 09:18:21PM +0200, Henrik /KaarPoSoft wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:10:25PM +0200, Henrik /KaarPoSoft wrote:
> >>I have a problem: ldapsearch results in "Segmentation fault" under
> >>openldap-2.4.23 with cyrus-sasl-2.1.23.
> >>[...]
>
> Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >If I
on 15/07/2010 15:27 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> Unfortunately, it didn't change. Kernel output during boot
> is still the same; it displays 1 package x 8 cores.
If you are sure that everything is done correctly (patch really applied, kernel
really rebuilt and reinstalled, and reboot was t
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 09:18:21PM +0200, Henrik /KaarPoSoft wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:10:25PM +0200, Henrik /KaarPoSoft wrote:
> >>I have a problem: ldapsearch results in "Segmentation fault" under
> >>openldap-2.4.23 with cyrus-sasl-2.1.23.
> >>[...]
>
> Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >If I
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 08:14:33AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> Before I get started, I should note that the system I'm testing on was
> built with the following two features in src.conf and make.conf;
> the lesser is for world, the lesser for world, respectively.
>
> /etc/src.conf:DEBU
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:14:58AM +0300, Reko Turja wrote:
> >I had similar issue with 8-RELEASE and cyrus-sasl2 with cyrus-saslauthd
> >linked against system kerberos.
> >
> >(uname -a xxx.xxx.xxx 8.0-RELEASE-p3 FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE-p3 #1:
> >Sat Jun 12 00:39:22 EEST 2010
> >r...@xxx.xxx.xxx:/usr
On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 21:18 +0200, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
> Jack Vogel schrieb am 18.06.2010 20:01 (localtime):
> > Yes, the commits today are slated to get into 8.1, at least that's my
> > understanding.
> >
> > Jack
>
> Hello, is this still on the to-merge-before-8.1-RELEASE list?
Its hard
> It may have gone in before the RELENG_8_1 tag/branch occurred? SVN
> r209309
>
> Jacks's change went into stable/8 on June 18:
>
Also, did anyone provide feedback on SVN r209959 to
head/sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c ?
It's saying "8.1 MFC", so you might want to ask people to test that on
stable/
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 15/07/2010 15:27 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > Unfortunately, it didn't change. Kernel output during boot
> > is still the same; it displays 1 package x 8 cores.
>
> If you are sure that everything is done correctly (patch really applied,
> kernel
> really
Howdy,
here is the image of my FreeBSD panic
http://images.cjb.net/d64f4.jpg
the error says RAM parity error(not visible in pic). but I have
following reasons to believed it could be wrong
1. I have 1GB of RAM, with two chips of 512MB each. It panics even if
I boot with only 512MB of total RAM.
On Jul 15, 2010, at 6:50 PM, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
>
>> It may have gone in before the RELENG_8_1 tag/branch occurred? SVN
>> r209309
>>
>> Jacks's change went into stable/8 on June 18:
>>
>
> Also, did anyone provide feedback on SVN r209959 to
> head/sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c ?
>
> It's s
On 07/15/10 13:31, Michael Tuexen wrote:
On Jul 15, 2010, at 6:50 PM, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
It may have gone in before the RELENG_8_1 tag/branch occurred? SVN
r209309
Jacks's change went into stable/8 on June 18:
Also, did anyone provide feedback on SVN r209959 to
head/
The fact that I WISH it to be MFC'd doesn't mean that I am actually given
permission to do so.
Jack
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Steve Polyack wrote:
> On 07/15/10 13:31, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>
>> On Jul 15, 2010, at 6:50 PM, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
It may have gon
on 15/07/2010 19:57 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> In topo_probe(), cpu_high is 0xd, so topo_probe_0xb() is
> called. But the cpuid 0xb instruction doesn't seem to
> return useful data: All values are zero already in the
> first level, so cpu_cores remains 0.
>
> Back in topo_probe(), there
> As Brian stated, the change has already been MFC'd into stable/8 (June
> 18th) with the following comment from Jack:
>
> "MFC to RELENG8.1 asap"
>
I also dont see the issue listed on:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/Releng/8.1TODO
If someone can put it on there, even if the RELENG engineer doesn
On Jul 15, 2010, at 7:48 PM, Steve Polyack wrote:
> On 07/15/10 13:31, Michael Tuexen wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 2010, at 6:50 PM, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
It may have gone in before the RELENG_8_1 tag/branch occurred? SVN
r209309
Jacks's change went into stable/
--
From: "Jeremy Chadwick"
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 7:22 PM
To: "Reko Turja"
Cc: "Henrik /KaarPoSoft" ;
Subject: Re: openldap client GSSAPI authentication segfaults in
fbsd8stablei386
That said, can you please execute the following in g
On Thursday, July 15, 2010 1:13:05 pm Masoom Shaikh wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> here is the image of my FreeBSD panic
> http://images.cjb.net/d64f4.jpg
>
> the error says RAM parity error(not visible in pic). but I have
> following reasons to believed it could be wrong
>
> 1. I have 1GB of RAM, with two
On Thursday, July 15, 2010 1:56:11 pm Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 15/07/2010 19:57 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > In topo_probe(), cpu_high is 0xd, so topo_probe_0xb() is
> > called. But the cpuid 0xb instruction doesn't seem to
> > return useful data: All values are zero already in the
> > f
On Thursday 15 July 2010 01:56 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 15/07/2010 19:57 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > In topo_probe(), cpu_high is 0xd, so topo_probe_0xb() is
> > called. But the cpuid 0xb instruction doesn't seem to
> > return useful data: All values are zero already in the
> > firs
On Thursday 15 July 2010 03:07 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On Thursday 15 July 2010 01:56 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 15/07/2010 19:57 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > > In topo_probe(), cpu_high is 0xd, so topo_probe_0xb() is
> > > called. But the cpuid 0xb instruction doesn't seem to
> > >
Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On Thursday 15 July 2010 01:56 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > on 15/07/2010 19:57 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> > > I patched topo_probe() so it calls topo_probe_0x4() after
> > > topo_probe_0xb() if cpu_cores is still 0. I think this
> > > is a better fallback proced
Dear stable list,
is there any update on bug hunting of the issue described here?
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/145064
I've attempted to install PC BSD 8.1-RC1 on my desktop and I'm facing
the same problem with the Marvell SATA driver. Therefore, PC BSD is
not installable on my m
Jung-uk Kim wrote:
On Wednesday 14 July 2010 05:40 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
On Wednesday 14 July 2010 01:31 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
on 14/07/2010 17:14 Oliver Fromme said the following:
In a machine installed yesterday, 8.1-PRERELEASE doesn't
seem to detect the number of CPU packages vs. cores p
David Xu wrote:
> Do you have patch for i386 branch ? I want to test.
> On my Pentium-D machine:
>
> $ sysctl kern.sched.topology_spec
> kern.sched.topology_spec:
>
>0, 1
>
>
>
> 0, 1
>
>
>
>
>
>
> it seems the kernel thinks that the
29 matches
Mail list logo
