> There is http://www.freebsd.org/smp/
>
> If someone wanted to convert this over to Twiki, go for it. New ideas to add
> to the list are welcome as well.
>
I'll install TWiki on my home server tomorrow and publish when I'm ready,
probably a day or so if all goes well.
Then people can try it
On Wednesday, 20 February 2002 at 23:48:12 -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 21-Feb-02 Greg Lehey wrote:
>> On Monday, 18 February 2002 at 15:38:07 -0500, Jake Burkholder wrote:
>>> Apparently, On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 11:51:44AM -0800,
>>> Matthew Dillon said words to the effect of;
On 21-Feb-02 George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
> I'm not in the core of the SMP stuff (the closest I'll get is the
> networking stuff) but I wonder if there is:
>
> 1) A work list of things that need to be done.
>
> 2) If that list is easy to read/update.
>
> Has anyone considered a Wiki to do th
On 21-Feb-02 Matthew Dillon wrote:
> This sounds better but why do we need a 'pause' at all? I don't
> think spinning in this case will have any effect on power
> consumption.
The pause is extra stuff mostly needed for the HyperThreading stuff on the
Pentium4 and also it helps impro
On 21-Feb-02 Greg Lehey wrote:
> On Monday, 18 February 2002 at 15:38:07 -0500, Jake Burkholder wrote:
>> Apparently, On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 11:51:44AM -0800,
>> Matthew Dillon said words to the effect of;
>>> I'm fairly sure JHB does not have a patch to address this but, please,
>>>
:Matthew Dillon wrote:
:> I'm not interested in using P4. I think it's a mistake. That is, I
:> think it is being severely overused. At the very least it is preventing
:> me from comitting simple things to -current because as far as I can tell
:> when you add up the junk sittin
Hi Jacques,
Make release fails here. Can it be your changes to kerberos?
John
--
John Hay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===> libexec/kdc
...
cc -O -pipe -I/usr/src/kerberos5/libexec/kdc/../../../crypto/heimdal/include
-I/usr/src/kerberos5/libexec/kdc/../../../crypto/heimdal/kdc
Greg Lehey wrote:
> On Tuesday, 19 February 2002 at 16:44:06 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 01:51:31PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> >> Bitkeeper enforces the linux devleopment model
> >> to a large extent,
> >
> > In what way(s)?
>
> I'd be interested in this too. I've
Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I'm not interested in using P4. I think it's a mistake. That is, I
> think it is being severely overused. At the very least it is preventing
> me from comitting simple things to -current because as far as I can tell
> when you add up the junk sitting in P
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:31:14PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, 19 February 2002 at 0:00:19 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> > Am I the only person who, despite careful scrutiny, missed this
> > announcement? I would have thought
On Wednesday, 20 February 2002 at 21:42:48 -0500, Andrew R. Reiter wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
>
>> I'm not in the core of the SMP stuff (the closest I'll get is the
>> networking stuff) but I wonder if there is:
>
> Doesn't this belong on [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that
On Wednesday, 20 February 2002 at 18:35:37 -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Greg Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020220 18:26] wrote:
>>
>> I'm not picking on jhb here. This is the project's fault, not any
>> individual's. We need some kind of project management to coordinate
>> this effort, or the
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
:I'm not in the core of the SMP stuff (the closest I'll get is the
:networking stuff) but I wonder if there is:
Doesn't this belong on [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that SMP people could answer?
:
:1) A work list of things that need to be done.
:
:2) I
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Greg Lehey wrote:
> On Tuesday, 19 February 2002 at 0:00:19 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Am I the only person who, despite careful scrutiny, missed this
> announcement? I would have thought that this would at least have been
> worth a HEADS UP and prior discussion in -cor
I'm not in the core of the SMP stuff (the closest I'll get is the
networking stuff) but I wonder if there is:
1) A work list of things that need to be done.
2) If that list is easy to read/update.
Has anyone considered a Wiki to do this kind of coordination? We used
TWiki at my last employer
* Greg Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020220 18:26] wrote:
>
> I'm not picking on jhb here. This is the project's fault, not any
> individual's. We need some kind of project management to coordinate
> this effort, or the results will be seriously suboptimal. I would
> certainly not like to see dil
On Monday, 18 February 2002 at 23:04:03 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Matthew Dillon wrote:
>>> What a waste.. John has already done all this stuff already (using
>>> td_ucred instead of p_ucred) over the entire tree.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Peter
>>
>> He didn't instrument Giant, and if you actuall
On Tuesday, 19 February 2002 at 0:00:19 -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
>> I'd prefer to be working on a branch of CVS if it weren't for the people
>> that would scream whenever I moved my merged tag up.
>> (eek eek cvsup bloat).
>> That way i would have a dozen people helping m
On Tuesday, 19 February 2002 at 16:44:06 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 01:51:31PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>> Bitkeeper enforces the linux devleopment model
>> to a large extent,
>
> In what way(s)?
I'd be interested in this too. I've been using Bitkeeper for, well,
L
:On Monday, 18 February 2002 at 15:38:07 -0500, Jake Burkholder wrote:
:> Apparently, On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 11:51:44AM -0800,
:> Matthew Dillon said words to the effect of;
:>> I'm fairly sure JHB does not have a patch to address this but, please,
:>> be my guest and check P4.
:>
:
This sounds better but why do we need a 'pause' at all? I don't
think spinning in this case will have any effect on power
consumption.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<[EMAIL
On Monday, 18 February 2002 at 15:38:07 -0500, Jake Burkholder wrote:
> Apparently, On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 11:51:44AM -0800,
> Matthew Dillon said words to the effect of;
>> I'm fairly sure JHB does not have a patch to address this but, please,
>> be my guest and check P4.
>
> Actua
Hi -current,
I ventured into this brave new world a few days ago and ran into
this very problem. Alexander's patch (along with a make install in
/usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils) fixed it, as advertised.
Maybe this can now be committed?
--Stijn
--
Help Wanted: Telepath. You know where to apply.
On 19-Feb-02 Terry Lambert wrote:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
>> The fully safe version of this code is:
>> td->td_retval[0] = td->td_ucred->cr_ruid;
>> td->td_retval[1] = td->td_ucred->cr_uid;
>> return (0);
>>
>> because td->td_ucred is read-only for it's whole existance.
>
> ???
>
> Are you su
On 18-Feb-02 Matthew Dillon wrote:
> While testing some Giant removal stuff I noticed that my current
> system sometimes got into an extremely non-optimal flip-flop situation
> between two processes contesting Giant on an SMP system which halved the
> syscall performance in the te
On 19-Feb-02 Seigo Tanimura wrote:
> Here is the most up-to-date version of pgrp/session lock (at Change 6700):
>
> http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tanimura/patches/pgrp10.diff.gz
>
> I would like to commit this on the next Sunday. Otherwise, my patch
> would conflict with other patches, especially
David,
I see it's already fixed so I'll assume that you no longer need the
compiler output. I'm sorry that I didn't answer before but I just
checked my email and went to some meetings and am just getting back.
Thanks for your help,
ed
Quoting David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Feb
* Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020220 11:13] wrote:
> Mark Santcroos wrote:
>
> > I managed to create a simple linux program that had the same problem. From
> > there on it was easy...
> >
> > The problem was created by Alfred's locking commit of Jan 13.
> > (No hard feelings, it helped me
Mark Santcroos wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 01:02:09AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Pretty clearly, if it happens, and the process is truly
> > gone, then there is a resource track cleanup that's
> > missing (perhaps it's a reference that results from the
> > Linux mmap resource track clean
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:02:38PM +0100, Jose M. Alcaide wrote:
> $ cc p.c -o p
> cc: installation problem, cannot exec `cpp0': No such file or directory
Fixed.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 07:49:19 -0800 (PST)
>From: David Wolfskill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Just built & installed today's -CURRENT (CVSup around 0347 hrs. PST):
>...
>Stopped at runq_choose+0x83: movl0(%edx),%eax
>db> trace
>runq_choose(c035a660,d683cd0c,c02b1b3e,c01a8d87,12e) at ru
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 09:21:14AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> I need to see the output of ``/usr/bin/cc -print-search-dirs'' from the
> problematic compiler.
$ /usr/bin/cc -print-search-dirs
install: /usr/libexec/(null)
programs: /usr/libexec/elf/
libraries: /usr/lib/
--
** Jose M. Alcai
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 05:53:59AM -0800, Edwin Culp wrote:
> On my daily build, my kernels are broken as per log:
>
> ===> wi
> cd /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PIII850N; MAKESRCPATH=/usr/src/sys/dev/aic7xxx/aicasm
> make -
> f /usr/src/sys/dev/aic7xxx/aicasm/Makefile
> Warning: Object directory not ch
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:02:38PM +0100, Jose M. Alcaide wrote:
> Using ktrace(1), I found that now cc searchs its subcomponents in
> /usr/libexec/elf. However, installworld puts them in /usr/libexec.
...
> Could this problem be related to the recent changes to
> src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_tools/freeb
> On my daily build, my kernels are broken as per log:
>
> ===> wi
> cd /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PIII850N; MAKESRCPATH=/usr/src/sys/dev/aic7xxx/aicasm
> make -
> f /usr/src/sys/dev/aic7xxx/aicasm/Makefile
> Warning: Object directory not changed from original /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PIII850N
> cc -O -p
* Mark Santcroos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020220 03:52] wrote:
>
> It was indeed a linux_compat specific resource cleanup issue.
>
> I managed to create a simple linux program that had the same problem. From
> there on it was easy...
>
> The problem was created by Alfred's locking commit of Jan 13
Hello,
Just made world, and now cc(1) fails:
$ cc p.c -o p
cc: installation problem, cannot exec `cpp0': No such file or directory
Using ktrace(1), I found that now cc searchs its subcomponents in
/usr/libexec/elf. However, installworld puts them in /usr/libexec.
Nothing is said about this prob
Just built & installed today's -CURRENT (CVSup around 0347 hrs. PST):
Wed Feb 20 05:48:23 PST 2002
FreeBSD/i386 (freebeast.catwhisker.org) (cuaa0)
login: Fboot() called on cpu#0
Waiting (max 60 seconds) for system process `vnlru' to stop...stopped
lock order reversal
1st 0xc0337420 sched lock
On my daily build, my kernels are broken as per log:
===> wi
cd /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PIII850N; MAKESRCPATH=/usr/src/sys/dev/aic7xxx/aicasm
make -
f /usr/src/sys/dev/aic7xxx/aicasm/Makefile
Warning: Object directory not changed from original /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PIII850N
cc -O -pipe -I/usr/incl
Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
> > I don't think pam.d is installed right now by default. Once it is
> > turned on by default I think mergemaster will DTRT.
> John's right. By design, mm only knows about things installed by
> /usr/src/etc/M
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 04-Jan-02 Michael D. Harnois wrote:
> > mergemaster does not pick up changes to the /etc/pam.d directory. Is
> > this a feature?
>
> I don't think pam.d is installed right now by default. Once it is turned on by
> default I think mergemaster will DT
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 01:02:09AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Pretty clearly, if it happens, and the process is truly
> gone, then there is a resource track cleanup that's
> missing (perhaps it's a reference that results from the
> Linux mmap resource track cleanup not releasing it?).
It was i
If my memory serves some time ago Jonathan Lemon was planning to add
ability to remotely debug kernel via TCP/IP. Try to contact him and
ask about the status of his work.
-Maxim
Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Now that
Michael Lucas wrote:
>
> I understand that we're getting to that stage where we need more
> -current testers.
>
> We all agree that the optimal thing would be to have hordes of very
> sophisticated users who can debug problems on their own and submit
> patches to fix all their issues. I would g
Hello,
These proposed articles can only help. I've been following this
list for a few years, I'm ready to contribute in my own small
way :-)
tom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Lucas wrote:
> I understand that we're getting to that stage where we need more
> -current testers.
>
> We all agree that
45 matches
Mail list logo
