From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 10 00:32:26 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D4A916A41F for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:32:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from j_guojun@lbl.gov) Received: from smtp119.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp119.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.64.92]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 63D1A13C447 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:32:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from j_guojun@lbl.gov) Received: (qmail 23942 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2007 00:32:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.9?) (jinmtb@sbcglobal.net@75.36.165.38 with plain) by smtp119.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 2007 00:32:25 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: fCQ4y_8VM1m6JslUO7srdXvsyvBxX8lMBa.Ti5O.nRXqU1bOp6423AiKQERFmySEe57tRls8Eg-- Message-ID: <466B4694.3060204@lbl.gov> Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2007 17:32:20 -0700 From: "Jin Guojun [VFFS]" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20061027 X-Accept-Language: en, zh, zh-CN MIME-Version: 1.0 To: questions@freebsd.org References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> In-Reply-To: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:32:26 -0000 Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration, following line causes the problem: options MAXDSIZ="(2097152U*1024)" Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen for some program? Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: > I have multiple FreeBSD 6.2 machines with different hardware, but one > of them encountered > this strange error when running program "wine". > I could not figure out what causes such error since > /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 absolutely exists, otherwise > no program will run. > > It does not matter if the wine is pre-compiled in packages or I built > it from ports. > All other machine do NOT have such problem. > > I reinstalled this machine a few times, and it always does the same > thing. However other programs > run well. > Would this is related to some particular hardware issue? > This one is ECS 848P-A7 motherboard with Intel P4 506+ CPU, plus 2 GB > memory. > Other machines are HP AMD64 laptop, DELL Dual XEON, DELL Intel Laptop, > and AMD XP 2100+, > and none of them ever had such problem. > > 129 /data: ldd `which wine` > /usr/local/bin/wine: > ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found > /usr/local/bin/wine: signal 6 > > 130 /data: ll /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 158712 Jan 11 23:39 /libexec/ld-elf.so.1* > > 131 /data: wine > ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found > Abort > > 132 /data: which wine > /usr/local/bin/wine > > Does someone have an idea what is happening here? > > -Jin > From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 10 00:53:24 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA5216A468 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:53:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from j_guojun@lbl.gov) Received: from smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.64.94]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CC51513C468 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:53:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from j_guojun@lbl.gov) Received: (qmail 20743 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2007 00:53:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.9?) (jinmtb@sbcglobal.net@75.36.165.38 with plain) by smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 2007 00:53:24 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: oTN83LgVM1nwpo_8YEvc4qLGRlAschpABce.buNc120VRKSR26PwA26E45Mwih2RI0C6VVFmsV5sZIU5L9QKrJ0iIEXj6y3ejtsV350Fo3mSzIj8MAs_ylS6oqpk Message-ID: <466B4B7E.4000006@lbl.gov> Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2007 17:53:18 -0700 From: "Jin Guojun [VFFS]" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20061027 X-Accept-Language: en, zh, zh-CN MIME-Version: 1.0 To: questions@freebsd.org References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <466B4694.3060204@lbl.gov> In-Reply-To: <466B4694.3060204@lbl.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 00:53:25 -0000 I believe that this is a memory sub-system bug somewhere because anything equal to or below 1G options MAXDSIZ="(1024*1024*1024)" will work regardless how many memory is installed in the system. I doubt this could be a hardware related issue although is memory size related. > Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration, > following line causes the problem: > > options MAXDSIZ="(2097152U*1024)" > > Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen > for some program? > > Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: > >> I have multiple FreeBSD 6.2 machines with different hardware, but one >> of them encountered >> this strange error when running program "wine". >> I could not figure out what causes such error since >> /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 absolutely exists, otherwise >> no program will run. >> >> It does not matter if the wine is pre-compiled in packages or I built >> it from ports. >> All other machine do NOT have such problem. >> >> I reinstalled this machine a few times, and it always does the same >> thing. However other programs >> run well. >> Would this is related to some particular hardware issue? >> This one is ECS 848P-A7 motherboard with Intel P4 506+ CPU, plus 2 GB >> memory. >> Other machines are HP AMD64 laptop, DELL Dual XEON, DELL Intel >> Laptop, and AMD XP 2100+, >> and none of them ever had such problem. >> >> 129 /data: ldd `which wine` >> /usr/local/bin/wine: >> ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found >> /usr/local/bin/wine: signal 6 >> >> 130 /data: ll /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 >> -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 158712 Jan 11 23:39 /libexec/ld-elf.so.1* >> >> 131 /data: wine >> ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found >> Abort >> >> 132 /data: which wine >> /usr/local/bin/wine >> >> Does someone have an idea what is happening here? >> >> -Jin >> -- ------------ Jin Guojun ----------- v --- jin@george.lbl.gov --- Distributed Systems Department http://www.dsd.lbl.gov/~jin Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720 From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 10 09:23:09 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A44D16A421 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:23:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=tyW4Ee=LK=vvelox.net=v.velox@yourhostingaccount.com) Received: from mailout20.yourhostingaccount.com (mailout20.yourhostingaccount.com [65.254.253.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEBEF13C468 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:23:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=tyW4Ee=LK=vvelox.net=v.velox@yourhostingaccount.com) Received: from mailscan33.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.15.33] helo=mailscan33.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout20.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1HxJAC-0001gN-3v for freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:52:44 -0400 Received: from authsmtp10.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.18.10] ident=exim) by mailscan33.yourhostingaccount.com with spamscanlookuphost (Exim) id 1HxJAB-0001Dn-HZ for freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:52:43 -0400 Received: from authsmtp10.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.18.10] helo=authsmtp10.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan33.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1HxJA8-0001D8-EE; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:52:40 -0400 Received: from cpe-24-93-100-44.columbus.res.rr.com ([24.93.100.44] helo=vixen42) by authsmtp10.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpa (Exim) id 1HxJA7-00041R-WF; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:52:40 -0400 Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:52:56 -0400 From: "Zane C.B." To: Oliver Herold Message-ID: <20070610045256.0bcc2f9b@vixen42> In-Reply-To: <20070608144142.GA52860@asgard.home> References: <4669651E.4030101@shopzeus.com> <20070608144142.GA52860@asgard.home> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.2 (GTK+ 2.10.12; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 0d1ca1697cdb7a831d4877828571b7ab:1570f0de6936c69fef9e164fffc541bc X-EN-AuthUser: vvelox2 Sender: "Zane C.B." X-EN-OrigIP: 24.93.100.44 X-EN-OrigHost: cpe-24-93-100-44.columbus.res.rr.com Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make.conf for Core 2 Duo E6320 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:23:09 -0000 On Fri, 8 Jun 2007 16:41:43 +0200 Oliver Herold wrote: > http://gentoo-wiki.com/Safe_Cflags#Intel_Core_2_Duo.2FQuad_.2F_Xeon_51xx.2F53xx > > But I wouldn't do it, maybe i686 is of some use to some extent, but > the more you customize, the more can and will certainly break. I would not worry about setting CPUTYPE?, but I would be very worried about setting fomit-frame-pointer. I've run into problems with it before. O2 is currently the default. I forget if it is used for building the world or not. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 12 09:42:34 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2954116A469 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:42:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vladimir.terziev@gbservices.biz) Received: from cat-btc.gbservices.biz (cat-btc.gbservices.biz [83.228.119.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81EE13C457 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:42:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vladimir.terziev@gbservices.biz) Received: from cat-btc.gbservices.biz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC7E51FA068; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:10:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fs.gbs.gbdom.com (fs.gbs.gbdom.com [192.168.2.244]) by cat.gbs.gbdom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18501FA067; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:10:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost.gbs.gbdom.com [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68CBA28574; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:10:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from daemon.gbs.gbdom.com (daemon.gbs.gbdom.com [192.168.2.104]) by fs.gbs.gbdom.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0202828534; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:10:44 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:10:44 +0300 From: Vladimir Terziev To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20070612121044.65c445ff.vlady@gbservices.biz> Organization: GB Services Ltd. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.6.4; i386-unknown-freebsd5.4) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV GBS-F X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV GBS-C Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: SATA RAID problems X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:42:34 -0000 Hi hackers, i have an Intel Core 2 server with on-board pseudo hardware SATA RAID -- Intel MatrixRAID. The RAID itself is configured in RAID1. The server is running FreeBSD 6.2-Release/AMD64. Since several days i have being found the follwoing messages in the system log: DOH! ata_alloc_request failed! FAILURE - out of memory in ata_raid_init_request g_vfs_done():ar0s1a[WRITE(offset=5587025920, length=16384)]error = 5 DOH! ata_alloc_composite failed! The messages appear in the system log at one and the same time -- as a result of execution of one (no idea which one exactly) of the cron-jobs in /etc/periodic/daily . The atacontrol utility reports the RAID1 itself is in good status. Is my RAID controller going away ? Thanks in advance! Vladimir P.S. I do not receive mails from freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org, so please send responses to my e-mail directly! From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 12 20:11:43 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C72916A477 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:11:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FE813C448 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:11:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5CKBeG7009427; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:11:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:27:03 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <466B4694.3060204@lbl.gov> <466B4B7E.4000006@lbl.gov> In-Reply-To: <466B4B7E.4000006@lbl.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706121527.04274.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:11:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.3/3411/Tue Jun 12 10:55:03 2007 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: "Jin Guojun \[VFFS\]" , questions@freebsd.org, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:11:43 -0000 On Saturday 09 June 2007 08:53:18 pm Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: > I believe that this is a memory sub-system bug somewhere because > anything equal to or below 1G > > options MAXDSIZ="(1024*1024*1024)" > > will work regardless how many memory is installed in the system. > I doubt this could be a hardware related issue although is memory size > related. > > > Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration, > > following line causes the problem: > > > > options MAXDSIZ="(2097152U*1024)" > > > > Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen > > for some program? This is setting aside 2GB for malloc which leaves only 1GB for all of mmap and stack. You probably don't have enough address space to map your binary. -- John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 12 20:51:25 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1A2216A46E; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:51:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F57013C468; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:51:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5CKBeG7009427; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:11:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:27:03 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <466B4694.3060204@lbl.gov> <466B4B7E.4000006@lbl.gov> In-Reply-To: <466B4B7E.4000006@lbl.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706121527.04274.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:11:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.3/3411/Tue Jun 12 10:55:03 2007 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: "Jin Guojun \[VFFS\]" , questions@freebsd.org, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:51:26 -0000 On Saturday 09 June 2007 08:53:18 pm Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: > I believe that this is a memory sub-system bug somewhere because > anything equal to or below 1G > > options MAXDSIZ="(1024*1024*1024)" > > will work regardless how many memory is installed in the system. > I doubt this could be a hardware related issue although is memory size > related. > > > Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration, > > following line causes the problem: > > > > options MAXDSIZ="(2097152U*1024)" > > > > Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen > > for some program? This is setting aside 2GB for malloc which leaves only 1GB for all of mmap and stack. You probably don't have enough address space to map your binary. -- John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 12 21:50:43 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A1016A46B for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:50:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Mariano.Benedettini@telefonicamoviles.com.ar) Received: from crmaimc01.crm.com.ar (crmaimc01.crm.com.ar [200.49.192.218]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB3B13C489 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:50:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Mariano.Benedettini@telefonicamoviles.com.ar) Received: from EXBEVSP02.Tmoviles.com.ar ([10.204.128.12]) by exfevsp01.Tmoviles.com.ar with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:20:00 -0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:19:59 -0300 Message-ID: <86C620511CD23548B0B3A358D5E9B72610B9BD@EXBEVSP02.Tmoviles.com.ar> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: MPT status Thread-Index: AcetL0ijSWWHWjqvQwS30+6ZmcBc9A== From: "Benedettini,Mariano" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jun 2007 20:20:00.0872 (UTC) FILETIME=[0DBA2680:01C7AD2F] Subject: MPT status X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:50:43 -0000 Hello. =20 I'm running 6.2-RELEASE amd64 on a Sunfire X4100, with a raid-1 configuration. I'm wondering how can I get the status of the raid (if it's degraded, etc ). Is there any way to do that ? mpt0: port 0xa800-0xa8ff mem 0xfc4fc000-0xfc4fffff,0xfc4e0000-0xfc4effff irq 28 at device 3.0 on pci2 mpt0: [GIANT-LOCKED] mpt0: MPI Version=3D1.5.12.0 mpt0: mpt_cam_event: 0x16 Best regards. =20 ---- Mariano Benedettini From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 01:46:50 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43B0016A46B for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jin@george.lbl.gov) Received: from smtp116.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp116.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.64.89]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27FCC13C469 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jin@george.lbl.gov) Received: (qmail 57654 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2007 01:20:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.201?) (jinmtb@sbcglobal.net@67.111.218.237 with plain) by smtp116.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 2007 01:20:09 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: g9K.TIgVM1mSVT0m0b0Bk1evXF1oBn4mekgh_xILT.4.0PaSz2zXyDpk1QAwT0TvjmSAytb2GA-- Message-ID: <466F4642.8070001@george.lbl.gov> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 18:20:02 -0700 From: Jin Guojun User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20061027 X-Accept-Language: zh, zh-CN, en To: John Baldwin References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <466B4694.3060204@lbl.gov> <466B4B7E.4000006@lbl.gov> <200706121527.04274.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200706121527.04274.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:46:50 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: On Saturday 09 June 2007 08:53:18 pm Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: I believe that this is a memory sub-system bug somewhere because anything equal to or below 1G options MAXDSIZ="(1024*1024*1024)" will work regardless how many memory is installed in the system. I doubt this could be a hardware related issue although is memory size related. Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration, following line causes the problem: options MAXDSIZ="(2097152U*1024)" Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen for some program? This is setting aside 2GB for malloc which leaves only 1GB for all of mmap and stack. You probably don't have enough address space to map your binary. This does not quite explain the problem. First of all, the MAXDSIZ is the maximum size for users to set their own datasize limit by 'limit' utility. If user do not set a high limit for datasize, it should not be a problem. The second aspect also counters this assumption, for machines that have less than or equal to 1 GB memory, and setting the MAXDISZ = the maximum memory size will not cause such problem. For example, if the physical memory size is 512 MB, and setting MAXDSIZ=(512*1024*1024) will not cause this problem. Or if the physical memory is 1GB, setting MAXDSIZ=(1024*1024*1024) will not cause the problem either. I will try to build a similar system on an AMD box with 2GB and more memory to see if this will be a problem. -Jin From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 14:42:47 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563F416A469; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:42:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD95E13C469; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:42:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5DEgiZ0016916; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:42:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Jin Guojun Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:01:25 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <200706121527.04274.jhb@freebsd.org> <466F4642.8070001@george.lbl.gov> In-Reply-To: <466F4642.8070001@george.lbl.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706131001.25840.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:42:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.3/3412/Wed Jun 13 08:42:18 2007 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:42:47 -0000 On Tuesday 12 June 2007 09:20:02 pm Jin Guojun wrote: > John Baldwin wrote:=20 > On Saturday 09 June 2007 08:53:18 pm Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: > =20 > I believe that this is a memory sub-system bug somewhere because=20 > anything equal to or below 1G >=20 > options MAXDSIZ=3D"(1024*1024*1024)" >=20 > will work regardless how many memory is installed in the system. > I doubt this could be a hardware related issue although is memory size=20 > related. >=20 > =20 > Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration,=20 > following line causes the problem: >=20 > options MAXDSIZ=3D"(2097152U*1024)" >=20 > Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen=20 > for some program? > =20 >=20 > This is setting aside 2GB for malloc which leaves only 1GB for all of mma= p and=20 > stack. You probably don't have enough address space to map your binary. > =20 > This does not quite explain the problem.=20 > First of all, the MAXDSIZ is the maximum size for users to set their own= datasize limit by 'limit' > utility.=A0 If user do not set a high limit for datasize, it should not = be a problem. UTSL. By default proc0 gets a hard limit (lim_max vs lim_cur) of MAXDSIZ, and the max limit is what the ELF image activator in the kernel uses when figuring out where to mmap the runtime linker: /* * We load the dynamic linker where a userland call * to mmap(0, ...) would put it. The rationale behind this * calculation is that it leaves room for the heap to grow to * its maximum allowed size. */ addr =3D round_page((vm_offset_t)imgp->proc->p_vmspace->vm_daddr + lim_max(imgp->proc, RLIMIT_DATA)); > The second aspect also counters this assumption, for machines that have = less than or equal to > 1 GB memory, and setting the MAXDISZ =3D the maximum memory size will no= t cause such problem. > For example, if the physical memory size is 512 MB, and setting MAXDSIZ= =3D(512*1024*1024) > will not cause this problem. Or if the physical memory is 1GB, setting M= AXDSIZ=3D(1024*1024*1024) > will not cause the problem either. Umm, the amount of physical memory has no bearing on how the virtual address space for userland is laid out. Do you know what virtual memory is and how it works? Your first e-mail seems to contradict this paragraph as in your first e-mail you noted that the physical memory doesn't matter, the solution was to not raise MAXDSIZ higher than 1GB and that is consistent with running out of virtual address space due to MAXDSIZ reserving too much address space for malloc(). =2D-=20 John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 17:45:56 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3117C16A494 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:45:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bseklecki@collaborativefusion.com) Received: from mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com (mx00.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.199]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1AEC13C45B for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:45:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bseklecki@collaborativefusion.com) Received: from collaborativefusion.com (mx01.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.201]) (TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by wingspan with esmtp; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:35:30 -0400 id 00056410.46702AE2.00000166 Received: from Internal Mail-Server by mx01 (envelope-from bseklecki@collaborativefusion.com) with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP; 13 Jun 2007 12:35:30 -0500 From: "Brian A. Seklecki" To: "Benedettini,Mariano" In-Reply-To: <86C620511CD23548B0B3A358D5E9B72610B9BD@EXBEVSP02.Tmoviles.com.ar> References: <86C620511CD23548B0B3A358D5E9B72610B9BD@EXBEVSP02.Tmoviles.com.ar> Organization: Collaborative Fusion, Inc. Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:35:29 -0400 Message-Id: <1181756129.1161.30.camel@soundwave.pgh.priv.collaborativefusion.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port x-pineapp-mail-mail-from: bseklecki@collaborativefusion.com x-pineapp-mail-rcpt-to: mariano.benedettini@telefonicamoviles.com.ar Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MPT status X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:45:56 -0000 amr(4) and ami(1) have management via the kernel; but it can be ugly. With Dell we have no choice; they don't map LSI/AMI RAID data into the DRAC/IPMI BMC. With Sun, you *should* be able to accomplish a lot of this via the LOM/ILOM card via Ethernet. Actually, for that price, actually, they should just pay a guy to sit there an watch for flashing drive failures. ~BAS On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 17:19 -0300, Benedettini,Mariano wrote: > it's degraded, etc ). Is there any way to do that ? -- Brian A. Seklecki Collaborative Fusion, Inc. IMPORTANT: This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient (or the individual responsible for the delivery of this message to an intended recipient), please be advised that any re-use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 22:32:48 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC0716A46B for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:32:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jin@george.lbl.gov) Received: from smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.64.94]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 66FB713C45D for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:32:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jin@george.lbl.gov) Received: (qmail 18018 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2007 22:32:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.201?) (jinmtb@sbcglobal.net@67.111.218.237 with plain) by smtp121.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 2007 22:32:47 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: U5VosxsVM1njcv2M9Z49yCH5X9_W8Bb2FvbTCI1aDhwBRuwYt.xEaWErt0m4qWdOV3oytRFtsA-- Message-ID: <4670708A.5030805@george.lbl.gov> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 15:32:42 -0700 From: Jin Guojun User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20061027 X-Accept-Language: zh, zh-CN, en To: John Baldwin References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <200706121527.04274.jhb@freebsd.org> <466F4642.8070001@george.lbl.gov> <200706131001.25840.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200706131001.25840.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 22:32:48 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: On Tuesday 12 June 2007 09:20:02 pm Jin Guojun wrote: John Baldwin wrote: On Saturday 09 June 2007 08:53:18 pm Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: I believe that this is a memory sub-system bug somewhere because anything equal to or below 1G options MAXDSIZ="(1024*1024*1024)" will work regardless how many memory is installed in the system. I doubt this could be a hardware related issue although is memory size related. Finally find cause but no idea why -- in kernel configuration, following line causes the problem: options MAXDSIZ="(2097152U*1024)" Can anyone explain why this can cause /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not seen for some program? This is setting aside 2GB for malloc which leaves only 1GB for all of mmap and stack. You probably don't have enough address space to map your binary. This does not quite explain the problem. First of all, the MAXDSIZ is the maximum size for users to set their own datas ize limit by 'limit' utility. If user do not set a high limit for datasize, it should not be a pro blem. UTSL. By default proc0 gets a hard limit (lim_max vs lim_cur) of MAXDSIZ, and the max limit is what the ELF image activator in the kernel uses when figuring out where to mmap the runtime linker: /* * We load the dynamic linker where a userland call * to mmap(0, ...) would put it. The rationale behind this * calculation is that it leaves room for the heap to grow to * its maximum allowed size. */ addr = round_page((vm_offset_t)imgp->proc->p_vmspace->vm_daddr + lim_max(imgp->proc, RLIMIT_DATA)); The second aspect also counters this assumption, for machines that have less t han or equal to 1 GB memory, and setting the MAXDISZ = the maximum memory size will not cause such problem. For example, if the physical memory size is 512 MB, and setting MAXDSIZ=(512*1 024*1024) will not cause this problem. Or if the physical memory is 1GB, setting MAXDSIZ =(1024*1024*1024) will not cause the problem either. Umm, the amount of physical memory has no bearing on how the virtual address space for userland is laid out. Do you know what virtual memory is and how it works? Your first e-mail seems to contradict this paragraph as in your first e-mail you noted that the physical memory doesn't matter, the solution was to not raise MAXDSIZ higher than 1GB and that is consistent with running out of virtual address space due to MAXDSIZ reserving too much address space for malloc(). No quite clear on this. Does this mean that the MAXDSIZ cannot exceeed 1GB regardless how many physical memory (say 16 GB) is installed? Then, this is definitiely a software bug. Then, somewhere the following checking is needed: #if (MAXDSIZ > 1024 * 1024 * 1024) #undef MAXDSIZ #define MAXDSIZ (1024 * 1024 * 1024) #endif From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 14 14:17:16 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F400616A400 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:17:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from badcrc@gmail.com) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.224]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A909F13C44C for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:17:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from badcrc@gmail.com) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 70so457828wra for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:17:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:x-google-sender-auth; b=HTx2gF4xKSE7AMm+Tr8TdFObO0tOLyxcMlr7RHK4pTG9tXMmiCRCKichu/KySemUJ9prtgge2gBNs6racspzT7eoG7LIvthI7zVmIK5wCgcB8xu3hX96OMGKZABwPCVvmXkoInjiHLqDfxBjbQqjk+iXFGU+t5HwAsfcEcFmxOE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:x-google-sender-auth; b=fSrKNOb9Q0SjtwMOm9SHk2NkMJJYXwJ8GqiVj5xxBGAncdo19kmRHnsBtNLq7RLTZ7VJ3Q8N9oHKch8A41To2XVSXrpTtNqEYb+vbu+bTtjubuEh+7dB5nc00BixAMDA9rzIRHAH5QxEM11N0tD//VMg4pTb+8D6WwHPKi+pnxY= Received: by 10.100.128.8 with SMTP id a8mr1090257and.1181829155120; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.177.8 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <980beae00706140652o405fb72kef2c0063dcc2e81d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:52:35 +0200 From: "Koldo Aingeru" Sender: badcrc@gmail.com To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: ce65166ae5fb345c Subject: Dell Poweredge 1950, boot problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:17:16 -0000 Hi, I just read your message (http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hardware/2006-December/004111.html) and I have a similar problem with a dell 2850, we have it now running at safe mode, did you manage to get the problem solved? Regards. Koldo. From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 14 18:09:06 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DAA916A41F; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:09:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D0B13C45B; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:09:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5EI91tM027133; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:09:03 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Jin Guojun Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:03:46 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <466B2B9F.5010308@lbl.gov> <200706131001.25840.jhb@freebsd.org> <4670708A.5030805@george.lbl.gov> In-Reply-To: <4670708A.5030805@george.lbl.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706141403.47035.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:09:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.3/3419/Thu Jun 14 09:49:39 2007 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what causes error -- ELF interpreter /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 not found X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:09:06 -0000 On Wednesday 13 June 2007 06:32:42 pm Jin Guojun wrote: > Umm, the amount of physical memory has no bearing on how the virtual > address space for userland is laid out. Do you know what virtual memory > is and how it works? Your first e-mail seems to contradict this paragraph > as in your first e-mail you noted that the physical memory doesn't matter, > the solution was to not raise MAXDSIZ higher than 1GB and that is consist= ent > with running out of virtual address space due to MAXDSIZ reserving too mu= ch > address space for malloc(). > =20 > No quite clear on this. Does this mean that the MAXDSIZ cannot exceeed 1= GB=20 regardless > how many physical memory (say 16 GB) is installed? Then, this is=20 definitiely a software bug. > Then, somewhere the following checking is needed: > =20 > #if (MAXDSIZ > 1024 * 1024 * 1024) > #undef=A0=A0 MAXDSIZ > #define=A0=A0 MAXDSIZ=A0=A0 (1024 * 1024 * 1024) > #endif It depends on the app. Some apps you can crank the malloc space up a whole= =20 lot. Also, if you are running FreeBSD/amd64 and running a 32-bit binary=20 under freebsd32 emulation, then it has 4GB of VA space rather than 3GB, so= =20 you can give it more MAXDSIZ. It's really up to the user to only use a=20 maxdsiz that works. You can also adjust the hard limit before exec'ing a=20 process that needs a smaller dsize and leave MAXDSIZ larger for other=20 processes. Since it is dependent on things the compiler can't know about a= t=20 the build time of the kernel, we just let the user set it to whatever and i= f=20 they set it too high things break until they lower it. You can even set th= is=20 at boot time via 'kern.maxdsiz' tunable in the loader w/o needing to=20 recompile. =2D-=20 John Baldwin