Re: openldap client GSSAPI authentication segfaults in fbsd8stablei386

Applying Benjamin's patch to RELENG_8 sources csupped yesterday stops the buildworld in last library stage: In file included from /usr/src/lib/libc/rpc/clnt_dg.c:55: /usr/src/lib/libc/../../include/rpc/rpcsec_gss.h:52: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'gss_cred_id_t' /usr/src/lib

Re: openldap client GSSAPI authentication segfaults in fbsd8stablei386

After manually changing the gssapi header used in /usr/src/include/rpc/rpcsec_gss.h to somewhat klunky "#include "/usr/src/crypto/heimdal/lib/gssapi/gssapi/gssapi.h"" system csupped yesterday built okay and after rebuilding cyrus-sasl, saslauthd and cyrus I get the following failures in log:

Re: SIGEPIPE after update to 8.1-RC2

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 12:11:50AM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 06:24:55PM +0300, Alex Kozlov wrote: > > After updating my buildbox from 26 April 8-STABLE > > to 8.1-RC2 I constantly getting SIGEPIPE > > > portsnap: > > Fetching 4 metadata patches... done. > > Applying m

em(4) + ALTQ

I'm wondering what the status of this problem is.. Will the fixes be in 8.1-RELEASE? I've checked through everything since the initial reports in February, and haven't seen a definitive answer.. Thanks! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: openldap client GSSAPI authentication segfaults in fbsd8stablei386

On 07/17/2010 03:37 PM, Reko Turja wrote: > >> Can you try reproducing the issue on 8-STABLE? >> >> I recently submitted a Heimdal patch against 8.1-STABLE and >> 9.0-CURRENT that resolves some libgssapi-related issues: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/147454 >> >> The patch b

Re: openldap client GSSAPI authentication segfaults in fbsd8stablei386

On 07/18/2010 06:52 AM, Reko Turja wrote: > After manually changing the gssapi header used in > /usr/src/include/rpc/rpcsec_gss.h to somewhat klunky "#include > "/usr/src/crypto/heimdal/lib/gssapi/gssapi/gssapi.h"" system csupped > yesterday built okay and after rebuilding cyrus-sasl, saslauthd and

Reporting Functional Server Models

I spent some time last week validating the 7, 8 and -CURRENT on different vendor hardware over here in my lab. Is there a current h/w compatibility list that folks are maintaining that I can update with my findings? Sean ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org

deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On the serial console I see swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 74, size: 4096 swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 128, size: 20480 swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 69, size: 4096 swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 6, si

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 05:08:09PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > On the serial console I see > swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 74, size: 4096 > swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 128, size: 20480 > swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 69

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

At 05:14 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: Where exactly is your swap partition? On one of the areca raidsets. # swapctl -l Device: 1024-blocks Used: /dev/da0s1b10485760 108 If you Google for "swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj" you'll find this is a pretty w

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 05:42:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 05:14 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > > >Where exactly is your swap partition? > > On one of the areca raidsets. > > # swapctl -l > Device: 1024-blocks Used: > /dev/da0s1b10485760 108 So is da0 actually

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 07:34:19PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > Now I'm confused -- this indicates twa(4) is involved, not arcmsr(4). > > Can you please provide a verbose explanation of the configuration of the > disks and controllers in this machine, including device and disk names > and what

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

At 10:34 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 05:42:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 05:14 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > > >Where exactly is your swap partition? > > On one of the areca raidsets. > > # swapctl -l > Device: 1024-blocks Used: > /dev/da0

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

At 10:58 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: I re-worked this out myself based on the OP's dmesg. It's confusing because there's literally 6 different storage controllers on a single machine: Its a big storage server. Some files dont require fast or frequent access, others do. The disks

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:01:03PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 10:34 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > >On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 05:42:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> At 05:14 PM 7/18/2010, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > >> > >> >Where exactly is your swap partition? > >> > >> On one of the ar

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 08:34:24PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 11:01:03PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > I do track some basic mem stats via rrd. Looking at the graphs upto > > that period, nothing unusual was happening > > sysctl vm.stats.vm | grep swap > > Here's ano

Re: deadlock or bad disk ? RELENG_8

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 08:58:44PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > I took a look at the RELENG_8 code responsible for printing this > message: src/sys/vm/swap_pager.c > > [...] > 1086 static int > 1087 swap_pager_getpages(vm_object_t object, vm_page_t *m, int count, int > reqpage) > 1088 { > [...