On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:04:40AM -0800, David Wolfskill wrote:
> My build machine (dmesg attached) is a dual CPU, single-core box; my
> laptop is a single CPU, single-core box. I track head on each daily;
> while the build machine has been locking up during the transition to
> multi-user mode si
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> > I'm getting crashes when trying to debug mozilla (under KSE).
> > The panic message is "panic: absolutely cannot call smp_ipi_shootdown
> > with interrupts already disabled". Attached is the trace.
> > Any
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> > I'm getting crashes when trying to debug mozilla (under KSE).
> > The panic message is "panic: absolutely cannot call smp_ipi_shootdown
> > with interrupts already disabled". Attached is the trace.
> > Any
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> I'm getting crashes when trying to debug mozilla (under KSE).
> The panic message is "panic: absolutely cannot call smp_ipi_shootdown
> with interrupts already disabled". Attached is the trace.
> Any ideas?
% (kgdb) bt
% #0 doadump () at /opt/FreeBSD
Soren Schmidt wrote:
It seems Petri Helenius wrote:
The problem of not being able to reboot without a panic seems to persist on
late current with ATAng and SMP.
The below doesn't say much actually, but I can reboot to my hearts content
on my SMP box here with no problems. What else do you
It seems Petri Helenius wrote:
> The problem of not being able to reboot without a panic seems to persist on
> late current with ATAng and SMP.
The below doesn't say much actually, but I can reboot to my hearts content
on my SMP box here with no problems. What else do you have in that kernel ?
>
On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:25:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote:
>
> > Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and if so could
> > someone tell what they are. I am interested in building dual system using
> > mp's but not sure which version wou
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Kargl
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 7:10 PM
> To: Andy Farkas
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Eriq Lamar
> Subject: Re: smp in 5.1
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:25:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote:
&g
.
;-)
Evan Dower
From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: smp in 5.1
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:40:21 -0400 (EDT)
I guess I'll chime in as well... I have a Dual Athlon 2000+ MP here and
it's running like a charm with SCHED_4BSD.
Andy
> An
On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:25:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote:
>
> > Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and if so could
> > someone tell what they are. I am interested in building dual system using
> > mp's but not sure which version wou
At 6:16 PM -0400 8/11/03, Eriq Lamar wrote:
Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and
if so could someone tell what they are. I am interested in
building dual system using mp's but not sure which version
would be better.
I run 5.x on a dual-Althon 2000 machine. I have no idea if
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote:
> Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and if so could
> someone tell what they are. I am interested in building dual system using
> mp's but not sure which version would be better.
Scheduling in 5.1 is broken (sched_ule doesn't even work
nt: Monday, August 11, 2003 7:10 PM
To: Andy Farkas
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Eriq Lamar
Subject: Re: smp in 5.1
On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:25:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote:
>
> > Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and if so
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Andy Farkas wrote:
> > Mr Wolf,
>
> Heh, you noticed :)
>
> > > Currently (cpu_idle_hlt=1) the load is fluctuating between 2.20 and 3.60
> > > every few minutes! (xload looks like a graph of a sinewave)
> > >
> > > If I set cpu_idle_hlt back to 0 the load goes back to a st
> Mr Wolf,
Heh, you noticed :)
> > Currently (cpu_idle_hlt=1) the load is fluctuating between 2.20 and 3.60
> > every few minutes! (xload looks like a graph of a sinewave)
> >
> > If I set cpu_idle_hlt back to 0 the load goes back to a steady 3.80 where
> > it should be.
>
> define "should".
Whe
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Andy Farkas wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Andy Farkas wrote:
> > > On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> > > > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> >
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Andy Farkas wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> > > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> > > kicked in some way to make it go get the newly runn
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Bosko Milekic wrote:
BM> A. Given the explanation, the small size of the limits makes a
BM> lot more sense now. Previously, the limit probably enforced the
BM> actual number of cached (pre-allocated) items in the pool. So, it was
BM> more than just a "limit," it was
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 03:47:54PM +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Bosko Milekic wrote:
[...]
> BM> It sounds to me like your example is really not the general-case one.
> BM> Basically, you're using a zone capped off at 1 page. Currently in
> BM> UMA, this is the size of the
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Bosko Milekic wrote:
BM>
BM>On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 09:03:00AM +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:
BM>> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Bosko Milekic wrote:
BM>>
BM>> BM>
BM>> BM>On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:31:26PM +0200, Lara & Harti Brandt wrote:
BM>> BM>[...]
BM>> BM>> Well the problem is, that
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 09:03:00AM +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Bosko Milekic wrote:
>
> BM>
> BM>On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:31:26PM +0200, Lara & Harti Brandt wrote:
> BM>[...]
> BM>> Well the problem is, that nothing is starved. I have an idle machine and
> BM>> a zone that
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003, Bosko Milekic wrote:
BM>
BM>On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:31:26PM +0200, Lara & Harti Brandt wrote:
BM>[...]
BM>> Well the problem is, that nothing is starved. I have an idle machine and
BM>> a zone that I have limited to 60 or so items. When allocating the 2nd
BM>> item I get bl
On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 08:31:26PM +0200, Lara & Harti Brandt wrote:
[...]
> Well the problem is, that nothing is starved. I have an idle machine and
> a zone that I have limited to 60 or so items. When allocating the 2nd
> item I get block on the zone limit. Usually I get unblocked whenever I
> f
Bosko Milekic wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 07:05:58PM +0200, Harti Brandt wrote:
Hi all,
it seems there is a problem with the zone allocator in SMP systems.
I have a zone, that has an upper limit on items that resolves to an
upper limit of pages of 1. It turns out, that allocations from thi
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003, Alp ATICI wrote:
> I was wondering whether the SMPng page at http://www.freebsd.org/smp is
> updated as those features are added. Because it seems like no feature
> update for long.
>
> For instance is the preemptible kernel going to be a part of 5.x series or
> going
> to
Certain operational sequences fair really badly when cpu_idle_hlt
is turned off, and its definitely due to contention. I've seen this
quite a lot. I have some numbers below.
Generally speaking I think its a good idea to wake up a HLTed cpu, but
it has to be done intelligently
On 10-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
> BTW in cpu_idle()
>
>#ifdef SMP
> if (mp_grab_cpu_hlt())
> return;
>#endif
>
>
> whta gain is there in this returning.. it will anyhow if there is work
> to do, and sched_runnable is called either way..
>
> couldn't it just be
>
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
> > 307.504u 93.581s 4:23.22 152.3% 3047+5913k 29+1055io 8pf+0w
> >
> > What is so stunning is the massive increase in user time
> > for the case where the cpu is not being idled.
> > I'm hoping this is a statistical artifact of some sort..
>
> I don't
On 10-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
> OK so I return with some numbers
>
>
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
>>
>> On 08-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
>> > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
>> > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor shou
John Baldwin wrote:
> On 09-Jul-2003 Terry Lambert wrote:
> > I thought that there was either a SPARC or Alpha box where Poul
> > had to mess with the divider because they were delivered round
> > robin, instead?
>
> No. The only anomaly I know of is that on Alpha 2100's, the clock
> interrupt se
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> OK so I return with some numbers
>
>
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> >
> > On 08-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
> > > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> > > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle pro
OK so I return with some numbers
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 08-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
> > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> > kicked in some way to make it go get the ne
On 09-Jul-2003 Terry Lambert wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
>> This is why HLT is not enabled in SMP by default (or at least was,
>> it may be turned on now). Given that the clock interrupts are
>> effectively broadcast to all CPU's one way or another for all
>> arch's (that I know of), you will ne
Andy Farkas wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> > kicked in some way to make it go get the newly runnable thread.
>
> Is this what's happenning to me a
Julian Elischer wrote:
> It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> kicked in some way to make it go get the newly runnable thread.
>
> If the processors are halting in the idle loop however, it may take
> quite a wh
John Baldwin wrote:
> This is why HLT is not enabled in SMP by default (or at least was,
> it may be turned on now). Given that the clock interrupts are
> effectively broadcast to all CPU's one way or another for all
> arch's (that I know of), you will never halt more than the interval
> between c
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 08-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
> > It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> > and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> > kicked in some way to make it go get the newly runnable thread.
> >
> > If the
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:
> It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> kicked in some way to make it go get the newly runnable thread.
Is this what's happenning to me an my setiathomes?
--
:{ [EM
On 08-Jul-2003 Julian Elischer wrote:
> It looks tp me that if we make a thread runnable
> and there is a processor in the idle loop, the idle processor should be
> kicked in some way to make it go get the newly runnable thread.
>
> If the processors are halting in the idle loop however, it may t
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 02:47:42 +0100 (BST)
RMH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello gentlemen,
>
> it seems CPU_SUSP_HLT does nothing for SMP kernels.
>
> i386/i386/machdep.c:
>
> #ifdef SMP
> static int cpu_idle_hlt = 0;
> #else
> static int cpu_idle_hlt = 1;
> #endif
>
> It's noted tha
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Killing wrote:
> > Halting them will still cause the CPUs to be detected. They just won't do
> > any useful work.
>
> Yep but the issue is that all the core admin tools are unaware of this and
> hence include the virtual cores in idle calcs etc making load monitoring
> impossi
Original Message -
From: "John-Mark Gurney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Yes 5.X is still new tech and may not run on all machines but on the ones
> > which it does ( and it runs very well here ) basic tools are required. If
> > it doesn't run on a machine your under know false impressions, if
Killing wrote this message on Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 18:47 +0100:
> I suppose the hurry is that basic utils that we use day to day like top
> and vmstat to monitor machine load cannot be trusted to give accurate
> info.
Actually, the basic tools ARE correct, there is a cpu sitting idle that
the sysa
> Well, hyperthreading can be disabled via a kernel directive, right?
>From what I've seen that was removed between 5.0 and 5.1 correct
me if Im wrong.
> > Which ever it needs someone to pick it up ASAP dont you think?
>
> Really? What's the hurry? FreeBSD 5.x isn't even bootable/installa
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Killing wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > sysctl machdep.hlt_logical_cpus:
> > > machdep.hlt_logical_cpus: 1
> >
> > Halting them will still cause the CPUs to be detected. They just won't do
> > any useful work.
>
> Yep bu
- Original Message -
From: "Doug White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > sysctl machdep.hlt_logical_cpus:
> > machdep.hlt_logical_cpus: 1
>
> Halting them will still cause the CPUs to be detected. They just won't do
> any useful work.
Yep but the issue is that all the core admin tools are unaware
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Steven Hartland wrote:
> sysctl machdep.hlt_logical_cpus:
> machdep.hlt_logical_cpus: 1
Halting them will still cause the CPUs to be detected. They just won't do
any useful work.
> Relevant sections from dmesg:
> Programming 24 pins in IOAPIC #0
> IOAPIC #0 intpin 2 -> irq 0
Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a brutal workaround (use a single 8254 clock and simulate the RTC
> clock), but it breaks some things (eg: high res profiling). I really dont
> like it, and I'm working on a different possibility as well (keep the 8259
> PIC alive and use it in ExtI
Cagle, John (ISS-Houston); [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SMP hang at boot on Compaq Proliant ML370
>
>
> John Baldwin wrote:
> >
> > On 15-Jan-2003 Cagle, John (ISS-Houston) wrote:
> > > That's a vicious rumor -- no operating system could work without
>
>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: John Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:55 AM
> >> To: Nicolas Kowalski
> >> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: SMP hang at boot on Compaq Proliant
g this problem? I had a similar
> problem on another box that was corrected with a newer BIOS version.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: John Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:55 AM
>> To: Nicola
"Cagle, John (ISS-Houston)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's a vicious rumor -- no operating system could work without clock
> interrupts in SMP mode... Could it?
>
> Which generation of the ML370 is having this problem? I had a similar
> problem on another box that was corrected with a newe
Message-
> From: John Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:55 AM
> To: Nicolas Kowalski
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SMP hang at boot on Compaq Proliant ML370
>
>
>
> On 15-Jan-2003 Nicolas Kowalski wrote:
> > [EMAIL PR
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Is the ML370 a new box? I've heard rumors recently that one of the
> recent Compaq boxes effectively doesn't generate clock interrupts
> in SMP mode and there isn't a workaround for that at the moment.
Yes. I received it last Friday.
I think the
On 15-Jan-2003 Nicolas Kowalski wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> I had a Compaq visit my lab recently. Unless the aic driver were
>> removed from the kernel (disabling it might have worked too) it
>> would screw up the floppy driver.
>>
>> This sounds like black magic, but the explanation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I had a Compaq visit my lab recently. Unless the aic driver were
> removed from the kernel (disabling it might have worked too) it
> would screw up the floppy driver.
>
> This sounds like black magic, but the explanation is that the aic
> driver has a very intrusive pr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nicolas Kowalski writes:
>Fritz Heinrichmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 11:09:09AM +0100, Nicolas Kowalski wrote:
>>> The server is configured for Unixware7, as told in the archives.
>>
>> our Compaq worked when configured for linux
>
>
Fritz Heinrichmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 11:09:09AM +0100, Nicolas Kowalski wrote:
>> The server is configured for Unixware7, as told in the archives.
>
> our Compaq worked when configured for linux
Nope :-(.
I just tried this option, and the server still hangs
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 11:09:09AM +0100, Nicolas Kowalski wrote:
> The server is configured for Unixware7, as told in the archives.
our Compaq worked when configured for linux
--
Fritz Heinrichmeyer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
FernUniversitaet Hagen, LG ES, 58084 Hagen (Germany)
To Unsubscribe: s
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:44:57 -0500
Garance A Drosihn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> ISO's? Do people think that would be a useful item to include?
Yes and no, let me explain. The first thing I do just after I install
FreBSD on a box (given it has enough cpu power) is rebuild world and
kernel
Le Wednesday 20 November 2002 11:25, Joel M. Baldwin a écrit :
> I haven't had any Hard Locks since I upgraded the BIOS on my
> BP6 from LP to RU and cvsup/buildworld/installworld again.
I'll upgrade my BIOS ASAP
>
> At the moment I'm thinking that my system is stable again, but
> won't feel comf
I haven't had any Hard Locks since I upgraded the BIOS on my
BP6 from LP to RU and cvsup/buildworld/installworld again.
At the moment I'm thinking that my system is stable again, but
won't feel comfortable with that until I do some more stress
testing. I've gotten a panic, but I think its unrela
Le Tuesday 19 November 2002 22:35, Nate Lawson a écrit :
> I have a couple BP6's running -stable and was having hard lock problems
> under heavy IO until I dropped back to ATA33 on the drives (I moved them
> to the onboard Intel controller instead of the HPT366). sos@ informed me
> that the HPT366
I have a couple BP6's running -stable and was having hard lock problems
under heavy IO until I dropped back to ATA33 on the drives (I moved them
to the onboard Intel controller instead of the HPT366). sos@ informed me
that the HPT366 has a buggy DMA controller and that ATA66 on them wouldn't
work.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, On 11/17/02 18:34:
> > I haven't been able to complete a full buildworld with an SMP on a
> > Abit BP6 (bi-celeron) board for two weeks (the kernel config is just
> > a full GENERIC with SMP and APICIO options enabled).
>
> I also am running a BP6. IS ANYONE successfull
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Robert Watson wrote:
> I've seen several reports that using a serial break to get into ddb is now
> quite a bit more reliable than a keyboard break. If you're not already
This is a fact. In RELENG_4, the keyboard interrupt handler is a
normal tty interrupt handler so it can
ack, I keep forgetting there are TWO conf dirs now. I didn't
even see those options. I'll try this also.
--On Sunday, November 17, 2002 8:55 PM +0100 Thierry Herbelot
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le Sunday 17 November 2002 20:46, Robert Watson a écrit :
I've seen several reports that using a
Le Sunday 17 November 2002 20:46, Robert Watson a écrit :
>
> I've seen several reports that using a serial break to get into ddb is now
> quite a bit more reliable than a keyboard break. If you're not already
> using a serial console, you might want to give it a try (make sure to turn
> on BREAK_
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Thierry Herbelot wrote:
> Even make -j1 buildworld with the SMP kernel ends with a complete freeze
> of the machine (the kernel does not go to a panic where I could try a
> backtrace)
I've seen several reports that using a serial break to get into ddb is now
quite a bit mor
--On Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:36 AM +0100 Thierry Herbelot
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le Sunday 17 November 2002 10:50, Joel M. Baldwin a écrit :
running dnet on a SMP kernel causes the kernel to panic.
[Hijacking another thread ?]
No problem, lets compare notes.
I haven't been able
Thus spake Glenn Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I have had no trouble with UP -STABLE running on a dual PPro system,
> > but I'm getting an early panic in UP and SMP -CURRENT on the same
> > system. I will post details to current@ soon if I can't figure out
> > the problem.
>
> The problem on -
> Ok, so they are all blocked. Does the machine
> respond to
> other interrupts ok? I.e., can you ssh into the
> machine
> and what not? Or is the machine basically hung?
Everything else was just fine. Actually I was
runnning top through ssh.
In /var/log/messages also nothing relevant.
Yuri.
On 02-May-2002 Yuri Victorovich wrote:
> I am running FreeBSD 5.0 on Alpha 7310.
>
> Apache httpd was running fine for a week and today
> after I've added
> mod_php4 I got after 30 min a condition when all
> httpd's were reported
> by top as "*Giant" not responding to TCP requests and
> "killall
Of course that should be an A7M266D...
(its friday, my brain is fried and i think i need to take a sauna...)
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Lamont Granquist wrote:
> GENERIC works, so this looks like an SMP problem.
>
> Its happening right after the CPU initializes. This is probably the first
> SMP code
Which mobo/chipset ?
* Lamont Granquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020323 02:14]:
>
> I just cvsupped about an hour ago, built world and built a kernel that was
> GENERIC with 486/586 turned off and SMP and IOAPIC turned on. It crashed
> while trying to mount root. Apologies for mistakes in the fol
GENERIC works, so this looks like an SMP problem.
Its happening right after the CPU initializes. This is probably the first
SMP code the machine runs? Is hardware incompatibility a good guess? I
would have expected that if someone broke ffs_mountfs() that someone else
would have noticed by no
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oliver Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: This can also be done
: with PCI slots, if that board doesn't have an ISA slot
: anymore, but I don't know which pins (it's _not_ the first
: two pins), and it's a lot more difficult because the PCI
: pins are
:I have a system using a fairly new Supermicro MB, with 2 P3-1GHZ, and 512mb
:ram. Running stable works fine at least a day or so with LOTS of activity.
:Running current it hangs (with no output of any kind, and apparently all
:interrupts disabled) so DDB does me no good... This requires a fair
Pete Carah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe I need an NMI button (or does that work?)
You can generate NMIs by shortening the first two pins of
an ISA slot with a screwdriver (the two pins close to the
back where the ISA slot covers are). This can also be done
with PCI slots, if that board do
--- Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a box, I've enabled SMP, and APIC, disabled
> WITNESS and
> INVARIANTS. It hangs after probing scsi right
> before
> mountroot. It looks like something may be botched
> with interrupts:
hi,
happy new year 2002!,
>
> APIC_IO: Testing 82
Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> If we are not going to use separate VM mapping s to keep the per-cpu
> information separate any more, then can we remove the support for it from
> the kernel?
No, this is still very much used. I really want to fix this and will try
and take a shot over the weekend.
>
Patrick Hartling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
} John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
}
} }
} } On 25-Oct-00 Chuck Robey wrote:
} } > I'm having rather extreme problems with stability on my dual PIII
} } > setup. I know this is to be expected, but it's gotten so extreme on my
} } > system, I c
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
}
} On 25-Oct-00 Chuck Robey wrote:
} > I'm having rather extreme problems with stability on my dual PIII
} > setup. I know this is to be expected, but it's gotten so extreme on my
} > system, I can't spend more than a few minutes before it locks up.
} >
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Mike Meyer wrote:
> Chuck Robey writes:
> > I'm having rather extreme problems with stability on my dual PIII
> > setup. I know this is to be expected, but it's gotten so extreme on my
> > system, I can't spend more than a few minutes before it locks up.
> >
> > Is there an
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 25-Oct-00 Chuck Robey wrote:
> > I'm having rather extreme problems with stability on my dual PIII
> > setup. I know this is to be expected, but it's gotten so extreme on my
> > system, I can't spend more than a few minutes before it locks up.
> >
On 25-Oct-00 Chuck Robey wrote:
> I'm having rather extreme problems with stability on my dual PIII
> setup. I know this is to be expected, but it's gotten so extreme on my
> system, I can't spend more than a few minutes before it locks up.
>
> Is there any chance that I could make things bette
Chuck Robey writes:
> I'm having rather extreme problems with stability on my dual PIII
> setup. I know this is to be expected, but it's gotten so extreme on my
> system, I can't spend more than a few minutes before it locks up.
>
> Is there any chance that I could make things better by using a
On Thursday, 7 September 2000 at 20:06:20 +0900, Motomichi Matsuzaki wrote:
>
> At 6 Sep 2000 18:35:17 -0700,
> Jason Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If you run into issues that appear related to the SMP changes, and they
>> aren't listed as known issues, please bring them up on the -smp or -
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Greg Lehey wrote:
> On Thursday, 7 September 2000 at 3:11:27 -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
> > I thought one of the SMP developers announced that it was now committed,
> > yet I haven't seen any commit messages for it ... I'm running the newest
> > patch, so am waiting
On Thursday, 7 September 2000 at 3:11:27 -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> I thought one of the SMP developers announced that it was now committed,
> yet I haven't seen any commit messages for it ... I'm running the newest
> patch, so am waiting for the commit messages before I actually do my
Jason Evans wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:31:06PM -0400, Wesley Morgan wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jason Evans wrote:
> >
> > > A static tag, named PRE_SMPNG, was created at 18:00 PDT. The SMP patches
> > > have now been committed.
> >
> > Is it safe to follow src-sys from PRE_SMPNG an
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:31:06PM -0400, Wesley Morgan wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jason Evans wrote:
>
> > A static tag, named PRE_SMPNG, was created at 18:00 PDT. The SMP patches
> > have now been committed.
>
> Is it safe to follow src-sys from PRE_SMPNG and everything else as
> -current?
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jason Evans wrote:
> A static tag, named PRE_SMPNG, was created at 18:00 PDT. The SMP patches
> have now been committed.
Is it safe to follow src-sys from PRE_SMPNG and everything else as
-current?
--
_ __ ___ ___ ___ ___
At 6 Sep 2000 18:35:17 -0700,
Jason Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you run into issues that appear related to the SMP changes, and they
> aren't listed as known issues, please bring them up on the -smp or -current
> mailing list.
this breaks building GENERIC kernel.
cc -c -O -pipe -Wall
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:11:27AM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> I thought one of the SMP developers announced that it was now committed,
> yet I haven't seen any commit messages for it ... I'm running the newest
> patch, so am waiting for the commit messages before I actually do my next
> upg
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 03:46:20PM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:
> Personally, I'm astonished that an SMP kernel will actually boot
> and run on a uniprocessor machine.
Grr, still getting used to mutt, and I didn't reply to the list. Yes, I'm
using an SMP board, and waiting on the arrival o
Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 7:36 PM + 2000/8/28, Alex Zepeda wrote:
>
> > Perhaps in a rush to get started, I've compiled and
> > been using a SMP kernel even before the second processor arrives. This
> > has worked fine, however I've gotten some rather weird hangs and
At 7:36 PM + 2000/8/28, Alex Zepeda wrote:
> Perhaps in a rush to get started, I've compiled and
> been using a SMP kernel even before the second processor arrives. This
> has worked fine, however I've gotten some rather weird hangs and crashes
> resulting in a nic
On Tuesday, 20 June 2000 at 11:16:24 +0200, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>
>> Am I the only person who miss a brief document which tells what
>> the outcome of the meeting was ?
>
> Who was there, anyway?
>From my trip report. This can hardly be conf
On Tuesday, 20 June 2000 at 9:41:57 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> Am I the only person who miss a brief document which tells what
> the outcome of the meeting was ?
I'm writing up a detailed trip report for my company. I can't see why
I shouldn't forward it to the SMP list as well, but I
1 - 100 of 287 matches
Mail list logo
