From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 11:06:43 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2389E278 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:06:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07C941BC0 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:06:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r1BB6gIK081230 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:06:42 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.6/8.14.6/Submit) id r1BB6gpl081228 for freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:06:42 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:06:42 GMT Message-Id: <201302111106.r1BB6gpl081228@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:06:43 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o kern/174933 emulation [linux] if_nameindex fail in linuxulator enviroment o ports/169988 emulation [PATCH] Update sysutils/linux-procps to 3.2.7; also up o ports/169896 emulation [patch] audio/linux-f10-alsa-lib: use OSS plugin by de o kern/169814 emulation [linux] ptrace is broken in Linux emulation o kern/169805 emulation [linux] utime() syscall does not work in linuxulator o kern/159646 emulation [linux] [patch] bump Linux version in linuxulator f kern/156691 emulation [vmware] [panic] panic when using hard disks as RAW de o kern/156353 emulation [ibcs2] ibcs2 binaries that execute on 4.x not working o kern/155577 emulation [boot] BTX halted after install. Reboot during install o kern/155040 emulation [linux] [patch] Linux recvfrom doesn't handle proto fa o kern/153990 emulation [hyper-v]: Will not install into Hyper-V on Server 200 o kern/153887 emulation [linux] Linux emulator not understand STB_GNU_UNIQUE b o kern/153243 emulation [ibcs2] Seg fault whne running COFF binary using iBCS2 o kern/151714 emulation [linux] print/acroread9 not usable due to lack of supp a bin/150262 emulation [patch] truss(1) -f doesn't follow descendants of the a kern/150186 emulation [parallels] [panic] Parallels Desktop: CDROM disconnec o ports/148097 emulation [patch] suggested addition to linux_base-* packages to o ports/148096 emulation emulators/linux_base-* can not be built from ports on o kern/147793 emulation [vmware] [panic] cdrom handling, panic, possible race o kern/146237 emulation [linux] Linux binaries not reading directories mounted p kern/144584 emulation [linprocfs][patch] bogus values in linprocfs o ports/142837 emulation [patch] emulators/linux_base-* packages fails to insta o kern/140156 emulation [linux] cdparanoia fails to read drive data f kern/138944 emulation [parallels] [regression] Parallels no longer works in o kern/138880 emulation [linux] munmap segfaults after linux_mmap2 stresstest o ports/135337 emulation [PATCH] emulators/linux_base-f10: incorrect bash usage s kern/133144 emulation [linux] linuxulator 2.6 crashes with nvidias libGL.so. o kern/126232 emulation [linux] Linux ioctl TCGETS (0x5401) always fails o kern/86619 emulation [linux] linux emulator interacts oddly with cp a kern/72920 emulation [linux] path "prefixing" is not done on unix domain so o kern/41543 emulation [patch] [request] easier wine/w23 support o kern/39201 emulation [linux] [patch] ptrace(2) and rfork(RFLINUXTHPN) confu o kern/36952 emulation [patch] [linux] ldd(1) command of linux does not work o kern/11165 emulation [ibcs2] IBCS2 doesn't work correctly with PID_MAX 9999 34 problems total. From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 14:29:05 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C44A8720; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:29:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f52.google.com (mail-qa0-f52.google.com [209.85.216.52]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E996381; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:29:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id bs12so1188533qab.11 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 06:28:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=WYjZzBfEhUsD3jwPCMFSXojL4JQWOd6JlETHLtMX/DE=; b=ZWCq4nEUd5e4gSslvmfgZuO8khHfsT6iehtivPtZ2p2LppKum1ITmQZu72+ksnnaQU 2SuKaYS/UNUpsk60PUdj8tPF1MhvxacDwMILfHy1Vpklb+fEW2KdA3Yr2JPDU8bySead edk99jLHI7Brg1m1is7+Q29je22wKSWL/ieCo1mpf81A9x/Pyp21smEDehMm6kBU4Ond jHOQ0cOwQ5Otg2BBHyrt7SMgvrE0qivjQCH0YnQZhK5kwdO7fHZCB7dJ070773mngYYD vlhi6XM6kjz9g0kn9vgajCxXfPj8k+0eGX4w3dvp7iVPNFFPezBPeV1okF+H1i4yeRv9 i7Xw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.69.100 with SMTP id y36mr1259661qci.34.1360591582127; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 06:06:22 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 06:06:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:06:21 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vjuLjkoKTzat02u4VOdiSyYKWKo Message-ID: Subject: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:29:05 -0000 Hello :-) I have found 9.1 to be far more less responsive than 9.0 and previous releases on my desktop. I have noted this slow down at 9.1-RC. I have AMD64 4GB RAM i3 CPU and when I simply run Chromium, VBox with Windows XP 64bit (1GB allocated) and VBox with Ubuntu 64bit (1GB allocated) my machine gets unresponsive - it does not even respond to ACPI shutdown, I need to kill it to get working again :-( I did not happen before. I have also noted that VBox 4.2.6 is working far more slower and makes bigger impact on the whole host performance - sometimes I need to wait some seconds to get the machine response back, this happens especially at loading stage :-( Is there any way to get back the efficiency of my FreeBSD? Maybe I need to bump some configuration to make it more efficient? :-) Any hints appreciated :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 15:41:14 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82BF423F for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:41:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from decke@bluelife.at) Received: from mail-ob0-f176.google.com (mail-ob0-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340159BC for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:41:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f176.google.com with SMTP id v19so6149832obq.35 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:41:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluelife.at; s=google; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=e3sxPJ7TarAraPGkipNqm82dbXGG85xr1XaH3C+yq34=; b=Hr4wHoIucqZRF6+uqZBVWe21CKPvLtEkiN17SLZ70LuHoTq8DHE0jWNkETohWL8wqF xxU7tfSsXpIRBVjRjOQJnzGudOP6WQwlWG22HKsS30GmBKcrA4kmtG/jyTJhIVLyYsWZ igNDhKc4GQ+K7ylCfzYGCxwcvBseoblbwqg8E= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=e3sxPJ7TarAraPGkipNqm82dbXGG85xr1XaH3C+yq34=; b=Gwxf86N+IRKk8vPbbXl9oNzugs+TF4ylUSsKne0PhjWq5dkdUy9yDONZb8weBeLFEu FVjyr1AIfB9eeyPmRvJjcKiMKGsVGv87/YogfV4pHZP7xmMlb1gaO3HEi+AW1C2n96SC t+JC9XXUnA8I+1J7k3ME4mQhgkFsg4CaUAPo69QVsNIqb0i0HSEra0dUHO5DZturKv1Q GlYGLrAlghpwB5yF8rqk8B7EQrM9yfJVxgpvJtp3p/Xk+d8BLx4G3L2lc7M4BpBwQtNy wGkl8r9z6crX+XwQ4JPDa7lBc1Uq0e84Qhs7+hPXAAnoo3+zriGPOVEFAHlZcCBl0fhE Ok5g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.7.129 with SMTP id j1mr10793883oea.54.1360597266995; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:41:06 -0800 (PST) Sender: decke@bluelife.at Received: by 10.76.22.134 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:41:06 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [80.123.233.199] In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:41:06 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Jo3fl_VkiIJvYPJzHhAJmWxaSYY Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= To: CeDeROM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmBAKNa7SkjZVoWNzoHx2xqlcn4KEO21lBTwk3eePam8f/WH/uEyZ5fH48szv7mFQcGUoLW Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:41:14 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:06 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > Hello :-) > > I have found 9.1 to be far more less responsive than 9.0 and previous > releases on my desktop. I have noted this slow down at 9.1-RC. I have > AMD64 4GB RAM i3 CPU and when I simply run Chromium, VBox with Windows > XP 64bit (1GB allocated) and VBox with Ubuntu 64bit (1GB allocated) my > machine gets unresponsive - it does not even respond to ACPI shutdown, > I need to kill it to get working again :-( I did not happen before. > > I have also noted that VBox 4.2.6 is working far more slower and makes > bigger impact on the whole host performance - sometimes I need to wait > some seconds to get the machine response back, this happens especially > at loading stage :-( > > Is there any way to get back the efficiency of my FreeBSD? Maybe I > need to bump some configuration to make it more efficient? :-) > > Any hints appreciated :-) > Tomek You can try to switch to emulators/virtualbox-ose-legacy which is VirtualBox 4.1.x just to rule out that this is a vbox regression. Just be sure to power down the VMs first. It would be interesting to watch if the machine starts to swap when that is all running. -- Bernhard Froehlich http://www.bluelife.at/ From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 15:48:29 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B470C5EE; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:48:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f43.google.com (mail-qa0-f43.google.com [209.85.216.43]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58ECEA33; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:48:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id dx4so1228418qab.9 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:48:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cjzHaUf9ELrVVemqL4f9uDHMc37oGbj3ZAVpWfKSjC8=; b=ZISnSDEPMw283I9lvTLq0o02AmGNvyiSHP9/Ygk97VQaCJMTywQnJ+vf54v7oHSvwz VrIJv2HSxivJJAF/mBx1Fg+ksAXnVlOtauBtvGH2VFSJKzn4Sc4F/d7Ev6yj0T0rrJmr 8fCk1/j7dziU7ir8PmA3L23y94dIr78HQCMfO946pOFEVZM3vavnr+A0HEseogaLlLPl WdEyclgsivCeZmrrXRtILLE7cNOgN66sxfrk7Ca7XuL5l+USSUkh+UCA/lKku8lIM5az fjf15VAss6kIuSgid0O8xzXVXu6+zTkXPsD6mdkAyDK212r/ANQ1IpPAiPv3hXZpuk7e JdpA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.177.14 with SMTP id bg14mr1328424qcb.51.1360597703144; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:48:23 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:48:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:48:22 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: qo3PzQOEmKBMiHilDclv-kpANjY Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bernhard_Fr=C3=B6hlich?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:48:29 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Bernhard Fr=C3=B6hlich = wrote: > You can try to switch to emulators/virtualbox-ose-legacy which is > VirtualBox 4.1.x > just to rule out that this is a vbox regression. Just be sure to power > down the VMs > first. > It would be interesting to watch if the machine starts to swap when that = is all > running. Hello Bernhard, thank you for your hints, I can try with VBox 4.1, but first I will try to get rid of the Ext2 from my system. On another machine I have switched to UFS2 and the speed increased noticably. I will let you know when I transfer all of those GB of data :-) Yes it looks like the cause of the hangup is the swap rush/deadlock but I could not verify it as the machine was unresponsive. Still both machines use 1GB of RAM per VM so still 2GB should be free. With other applications running and the OS taking 1GB itself (what I have seen on some other posts) this may happen :-( Best regards :-) Tomek --=20 CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 15:55:00 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4239E93B; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:55:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qc0-f170.google.com (mail-qc0-f170.google.com [209.85.216.170]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDCEA8F; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:54:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id d42so2288670qca.29 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:54:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=JuzwGF1sGf+3EfNiIOVcd18uIBxGx3UZq/+hX5rjaLY=; b=piw62SsFznEeoIZNs7GNCKCFMZyUmPeB5OjaUMMnUOFD94P/z9iV/MuvB5/5UUky9l sslCqtor4ZPy7JvtJ/1jj7JHffpfej964UGWC6IKnKdueJZNhY1nzc3OJe5i1uC11gqj IqW4RKg47lgiK12lfcmOwuvP/CoK5z9sBMfC5ngkLaD53IvEtYvx9fb2p9MV2cTJvaov qkDEqt2AkJjcgZcFdWEZaujSMNnIEBi7nFnf7AnzyFKv0oL3tA9VRLoJFmMF47o/CE/h Gdc8fOxus4SivlNfnq3yTF0QHWag/e5AG+8aj2NfFLSApoyvU6TPwgiwUk44iz/mm3hG d5sg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.209.193 with SMTP id gh1mr5712495qab.86.1360598099313; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:54:59 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 07:54:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:54:59 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: N6EfTH4EZlIGUE9RQu3xyep0cx0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:55:00 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:06 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > I have found 9.1 to be far more less responsive than 9.0 and previous > releases on my desktop. Right now as I backup my data (~250GB) I also notice deadlocks on data transfers. I also noticed that on another machine (6 cores, 16GB RAM) with 9.1-RELEASE AMD64. Maybe the responsiveness issue is related to disk access/transfers..? -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 16:07:06 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB760FF6 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:07:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from decke@bluelife.at) Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com (mail-ob0-f178.google.com [209.85.214.178]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74107B46 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:07:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id wd20so6256188obb.9 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:07:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluelife.at; s=google; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tmCi2XzsjC9C1jHHi7+Qmr8/NWsRu9UcO0EC6r3lrK4=; b=ehMnu0Ow6IJk+DM3cmiYS5IIHNewGiDT1pBz5NXTlcAh4icbjGVPeMF2/DVdjRkv/V ZUPfkB3Z3KlciMY3P9CeBjOrmkl0KmSRAhMEoDf/GN7NhOTSSaD8Ucx0t1ciherR25NT F7k2MKqwh7U615BHSwtu4JDoGG/hXRCOdvK9Q= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=tmCi2XzsjC9C1jHHi7+Qmr8/NWsRu9UcO0EC6r3lrK4=; b=UF4ArAZbZO/ihqDXR/7mx3P3IB2/dxWbQOw93lZfBOK68w4qW92v+n8Is+HgR13VKi +3codveiKHAsRv5xsPadv5zoEgl7BCb0TQRcP21d9qk3tiBWttzZjLPUJRDBw4mHXUC0 4W6eFpo28OAxa90Zg0dxD3TfRksTtP8rvQOojQ/fr5i4RY90Cs30mA/LJuyhQIukyxEt drSCxazgY59iMCgvnal/CaQbfURaVmXx18gWfNFZ+DxCTNQbI1BaVg2rZoWNf38mzWGA t++MUKJ3niUFUVKyxwyTFkwMK4XmvbarpUsNOa5D3+OBxzrWS6FaGVbA/gPcfaFmIEzf zrKg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.27.161 with SMTP id u1mr10813292oeg.1.1360598438280; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:00:38 -0800 (PST) Sender: decke@bluelife.at Received: by 10.76.22.134 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:00:38 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [80.123.233.199] In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:00:38 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7BPxuA7d9ZVch7x97aTKwJVRlTg Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= To: CeDeROM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnyM79sK3CMu6t/cwlg0o1LgTgxISLFWXZXIMu+1oPbHpirdniCgqb1uvOj0JlvL5Lv0aHo Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:07:06 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 4:48 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Bernhard Fr=F6hlich = wrote: >> You can try to switch to emulators/virtualbox-ose-legacy which is >> VirtualBox 4.1.x >> just to rule out that this is a vbox regression. Just be sure to power >> down the VMs >> first. >> It would be interesting to watch if the machine starts to swap when that= is all >> running. > > Hello Bernhard, thank you for your hints, I can try with VBox 4.1, but > first I will try to get rid of the Ext2 from my system. On another > machine I have switched to UFS2 and the speed increased noticably. I > will let you know when I transfer all of those GB of data :-) > > Yes it looks like the cause of the hangup is the swap rush/deadlock > but I could not verify it as the machine was unresponsive. Still both > machines use 1GB of RAM per VM so still 2GB should be free. With other > applications running and the OS taking 1GB itself (what I have seen on > some other posts) this may happen :-( VBox itself also needs some RAM and the emulated Graphics Card which can easily be 128M per VM. --=20 Bernhard Froehlich http://www.bluelife.at/ From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 16:08:39 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCB97DB; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:08:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f45.google.com (mail-qa0-f45.google.com [209.85.216.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5578BB5B; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:08:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id g10so1229240qah.18 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:08:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pnwRNt6UIeEX9FMNG/LwElBb+Dmn4p+5sAiZUccIB4o=; b=Hg8xn2Cr+pwRIKFWBSvNtj8nmGzvwEwyk98DfZMIOIdajr16NtsKE+T3IFeoA4Xt7R 7FDeuz1p7X4miCQMPVhRJJdcS6aom6ThrgH7su68PotZyPlNyOCMX88JH77ZweqmjbeC otUr0DvMhrrwLBQmoEnhOwqCGn72l+CmWAv5EugksHyedD4W3i0b6rpWTTyEfVxersHe bluIJfQySokIx3BrDsflkX0PXlw+Ups731Ir5H//eIBNAtj3e2llaiTqNMd1iyHEctvU 3JGioTkW3xTA383gGSZPRL2vJ64KZDOzMPvzREhbX72+uIDkzax9+wjDzVDrZQVQnj32 no+A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.209.193 with SMTP id gh1mr5731121qab.86.1360598918583; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:08:38 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:08:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:08:38 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: K4-H1VV8uGUJNgPDl0Cb0eo2jco Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bernhard_Fr=C3=B6hlich?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 16:08:39 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Bernhard Fr=C3=B6hlich = wrote: > VBox itself also needs some RAM and the emulated Graphics Card which > can easily be 128M per VM. This is what I get with CP and one VBox running - memory use is not that high but the responsiveness is getting low now: last pid: 20852; load averages: 0.66, 0.64, 0.49 up 0+03:28:10 17:06:38 100 processes: 1 running, 97 sleeping, 2 zombie CPU: 3.2% user, 0.0% nice, 1.7% system, 0.3% interrupt, 94.8% idle Mem: 1072M Active, 312M Inact, 2187M Wired, 91M Cache, 395M Buf, 80M Free Swap: 6071M Total, 284M Used, 5786M Free, 4% Inuse PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAN= D 20846 cd 20 20 0 1489M 1191M uwait 3 1:20 15.48% Virtua= lBox 2199 cd 1 29 0 195M 51276K select 1 20:26 10.69% Xorg 2279 cd 2 22 0 169M 14556K piperd 1 0:47 0.20% Termin= al 20724 root 1 20 0 18112K 3060K vnread 0 2:42 0.10% cp 2500 cd 7 20 0 1106M 199M sbwait 1 3:18 0.00% chrome 2485 cd 21 20 0 503M 99948K uwait 3 1:51 0.00% chrome --=20 CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 11 22:35:16 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD74FFB; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:35:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qe0-f42.google.com (mail-qe0-f42.google.com [209.85.128.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41AF279; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:35:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f42.google.com with SMTP id 2so2827919qeb.1 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:35:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LxxYbkquJHfHcACf6wiIHTds3TwK7udXDiPy+dPm9ac=; b=wE/lqtUc4sgDQsnk1/GgTriVc1nvFxN5S78pZRv8zmRTAGswupBYwAzux/i5EWQw73 G2GzTH2DHJHuOSgXIyx3PjrOyvbBIOIy1Phb5MYVqIx/Fr9SbTe6J4pZB1sdXMQCNDqT l3QSXzlhO9opQL6Wt9J2wkqjs26F19sJ+6DSFdeRW+b6OEdWLyTFk6gsxceM+wTXTAAH TyY7dFyyje9YoMsv0/4ImGkWzMDN5Uf64W6UpkCJRMAWeNPxPEy+i+34UvOtioARKNTH oc/rSJTYnJp3XSvs6nhtiU4Gjn7Y35ehTuLo1st60g4X04ZeyjLfDA2Ym4qyqmeA6W4d wOsA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.186.81 with SMTP id cr17mr6057488qab.99.1360622114862; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:35:14 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:35:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:35:14 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: haSWLvLlgoYi8LHWnJxbX4vMATs Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bernhard_Fr=C3=B6hlich?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:35:16 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:08 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Bernhard Fr=C3=B6hlich wrote: >> VBox itself also needs some RAM and the emulated Graphics Card which >> can easily be 128M per VM. > > This is what I get with CP and one VBox running - memory use is not > that high but the responsiveness is getting low now: I am now almost sure that these delays are caused by IO and/or MEMORY operations because I can see dramatical decrease in responsivness when: 1. I have constant IO operations provided by copying ~250GB of data from/to external drive. Copying takes really lots of time and slows down the whole system noticably. 2. When any bigger application starts whole system slows down - i.e. my xorg/xfce4 keeps me waiting some seconds for action, still i can hear fluent mp3 stream behind. After application is loaded it works pretty fine until it starts operating on a data or unloads. When VBox starts the vmachine I get terrible glitches, then when everything is loaded system and vmachine works fine until it needs to load something that again slows down the whole system, then when I want to shut down the machine it gets unresponsive. 3. When the swap starts working things also gets really bad. I can work on VESA xorg driver, I can have no multimedia drivers, but the system performance is really important factor for me and working like this is really unpleasant on a pretty modern machine :-( I dont want to even think to switch to Ubuntu :-P Any hints on how to fix this situation are highly welcome :-) --=20 CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 12:11:13 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C904224B; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:11:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f49.google.com (mail-qa0-f49.google.com [209.85.216.49]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E41A2C; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:11:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id o13so41275qaj.15 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 04:11:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1vvF2AlVjSsMOPXTNd1dTp7nljms1c+qMVDxSfM63CE=; b=UoLt4qaLC1MrapMul7KJYiqv9tOwLdCfNBFw180k4rvqAYl6ib5+2R7eE9ViXtmI2/ y2hcz0feA6Cup9x4A4Nj5Ymamru5/0uOCS5BOANcWy0XseFU+AUHVbnQPeaMFlsYM2o8 idRr84rIIF5Rgp36PPQPmB0YLlx/6jvGUWggcQm7yCYMyV3Z7zYHNJcKPHfYh7U2fOFK qryIkM4tAZ3PDEN2Pj8X2XShs7dqeCGXaPumionE5/3NvAXLc0Ha1XLA0TghU9YROjwl I1O++7NcyKC1oB4XPzcO7bGa3zRcMhPhZ4Tqo/nEpxtIBaufk4vGug+JD40U5rdBN9Tg hSrg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.177.8 with SMTP id bg8mr6813311qab.87.1360671072517; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 04:11:12 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 04:11:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:11:12 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: jtI0cE1Rd1ceJ7dR0cqtZe7c-a8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bernhard_Fr=C3=B6hlich?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:11:13 -0000 On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:35 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > I can work on VESA xorg driver, I can have no multimedia drivers, but > the system performance is really important factor for me and working > like this is really unpleasant on a pretty modern machine :-( I made a short movie to show how bad this looks :-) After some time of moving data from ext2 sata partition to ufs2 usb partition I have started Xorg, the speed is a disaster, then I have shutdown the Xorg, stopped file transfer and starter Xorg again, things were okay, then started transfer again and things get worse and worse again... http://youtu.be/5pLODViX3JY Now when all of the data are back on the sata drive with UFS2 things seems a lot better. Do you think this may be the EXT2 issue? Still when swap starts working there is a slowdown to the whole system. What are recommended flags to build the kernel for efficiency? Does debug symbols in kernel can slow things down? Any hints welcome! :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 13:02:10 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4044C512 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:02:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from c47g@gmx.at) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B435EDB1 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:02:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.24]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MOEAc-1U1vaA3fEa-005ZuY for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:02:02 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2013 13:02:02 -0000 Received: from cm56-168-232.liwest.at (EHLO bones.gusis.at) [86.56.168.232] by mail.gmx.net (mp024) with SMTP; 12 Feb 2013 14:02:02 +0100 X-Authenticated: #9978462 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+1REUBMdW1MA8pdUSRQbmizeMwsCb2h/UUMC1WKk oeYbGiKMSV5nKw From: Christian Gusenbauer To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:04:28 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/9.1-STABLE; KDE/4.8.4; amd64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201302121404.28342.c47g@gmx.at> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, CeDeROM X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:02:10 -0000 On Tuesday 12 February 2013 13:11:12 CeDeROM wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:35 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > > I can work on VESA xorg driver, I can have no multimedia drivers, but > > the system performance is really important factor for me and working > > like this is really unpleasant on a pretty modern machine :-( > > I made a short movie to show how bad this looks :-) After some time of > moving data from ext2 sata partition to ufs2 usb partition I have > started Xorg, the speed is a disaster, then I have shutdown the Xorg, > stopped file transfer and starter Xorg again, things were okay, then > started transfer again and things get worse and worse again... > > http://youtu.be/5pLODViX3JY > > Now when all of the data are back on the sata drive with UFS2 things > seems a lot better. Do you think this may be the EXT2 issue? Still > when swap starts working there is a slowdown to the whole system. > > What are recommended flags to build the kernel for efficiency? > > Does debug symbols in kernel can slow things down? > > Any hints welcome! :-) > Tomek Hi! Maybe it's hardware related? I experience the same slowness as you do as soon as I copy more than a few MB of data *on the same drive*. It doesn't make any difference if the destination is on the same filesystem or not. When the copy is done, everything is back to normal. Recently I bought a new drive for doing backups which I connect via eSata. Now guess what: copying data on that drive does not affect the performance of the system! But copying data from that drive to the old one renders the machine unusable as soon as the write starts. Here's the dmesg output of my old drive: ada0 at ahcich2 bus 0 scbus2 target 0 lun 0 ada0: ATA-8 SATA 2.x device ada0: 300.000MB/s transfers (SATA 2.x, UDMA6, PIO 8192bytes) ada0: Command Queueing enabled ada0: 305245MB (625142448 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada0: Previously was known as ad0 and here the one of the new drive: ada1 at ahcich0 bus 0 scbus0 target 0 lun 0 ada1: ATA-8 SATA 3.x device ada1: 150.000MB/s transfers (SATA 1.x, UDMA6, PIO 8192bytes) ada1: Command Queueing enabled ada1: 1907729MB (3907029168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada1: Previously was known as ad1 My motherboard is an ASUS P5B-E. Do you have an external drive which you can use for a test? Ciao, Christian. From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 13:24:15 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F53E4E; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:24:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f46.google.com (mail-qa0-f46.google.com [209.85.216.46]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C619ED0; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:24:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id o13so1656424qaj.12 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:24:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=m7LX+RspI9zdD0bnOJqZzriRYQGH4MBMfaDpgehHabw=; b=lf+aPLmF5sSW2IpYNcwMqj7L/V9dbfb/uMYln2UC+0YGxLXtwYSxKhrdP+3L2EOot/ SidBffeqdpzmwprR/BGCCt/I3r05Q5kumS1lxgePCZn+qVGrqQHPw8XvYApVtdG+Ht2i qKBqs+EM/OjXGCDYfdgyKu+t0ZLWrqqSdefOhIe6+WEg/BbWPGWRYtjeND61C8gXObNF smH89P7TP8iqpHXykibuhdR3c+tPBzFq7fqku6YiiyrOK78nsHWf4GUbbZpmYLc3h/hX QCm8fnJV5LBrdBpJOpl0zBvQHA6Ser+WH9w9u5ITu+e2o+GHTMgfqR3xb2dyL5ZspPMd lmyw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.222.15 with SMTP id ie15mr7180088qab.75.1360675044593; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:17:24 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:17:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201302121404.28342.c47g@gmx.at> References: <201302121404.28342.c47g@gmx.at> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:17:24 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Qg0HOAkb48fExR3XT8E52K2MqvI Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Christian Gusenbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:24:15 -0000 On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Christian Gusenbauer wrote: > Maybe it's hardware related? I experience the same slowness as you do as soon > as I copy more than a few MB of data *on the same drive*. (...) Hello Christian :-) Thank you for your feedback! :-) There was no problem today to copy from internal ufs2 to external ufs2, but I have tried to copy back from external (ufs2) to internal (ufs2) and guess what - I got the terrible slowdown!!! Just when I hit Ctrl+C things get back to normal right away.. so the problem is with writing to the WDC SATA drive... Is it something wrong with the mass storage / ahci / sata driver? Yesterday I have switched the SATA from RAID to AHCI mode, but this seems to change nothing. Is it something wrong with the WDC drives? :-\ Internal drive: ada0 at ahcich0 bus 0 scbus0 target 0 lun 0 ada0: ATA-8 SATA 2.x device ada0: 300.000MB/s transfers (SATA 2.x, UDMA6, PIO 8192bytes) ada0: Command Queueing enabled ada0: 476940MB (976773168 512 byte sectors: 16H 63S/T 16383C) ada0: Previously was known as ad4 External drive: da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 scbus5 target 0 lun 0 da0: Fixed Direct Access SCSI-2 device da0: 40.000MB/s transfers da0: 305245MB (625142448 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 38913C) Thank you!! :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 13:24:30 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2B23F7E; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:24:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qc0-f180.google.com (mail-qc0-f180.google.com [209.85.216.180]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 614EFED7; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:24:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id v28so24687qcm.11 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:24:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=R1q+fvSyPOTgC7Hlx3UXMyaZQzWPW3ZHvWbsoU5OK3c=; b=TD/6oz7/aEs3ExxC4i3XUFGZDqnBcLeU0hnDHCQtOW2dbGmGdJSutuhoK+w6xLlv34 XRLYhu2x4Z3Lrvj4u5I4/04WEcXb8uBwOdsaTOmvbuPyHVjVsPmVLB0KVvuOLo8n6yYA oSGN3B7J7OkKOjLBTWKfTX1YxZVFRtoDfgQYUUOwpaElOmKWxYphiNPydPpC/iLzvvV4 F59awDQRjJebsoNLdKezfk+OLTAG13yX33Rl0g/AlUClMecVQp6jULeBzK6e9UOlrxpx 7RhrOUO+DVzzp35VHOxnhVLE+YfAdf8MT149DYPLv1uQZrrXjwVwtDYjLsPhyx6H0tQl 48LQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.209.193 with SMTP id gh1mr7012470qab.86.1360675464593; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:24:24 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:24:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201302121404.28342.c47g@gmx.at> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:24:24 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: igIj1DJM9u5HCZsBg9Nb6UvignY Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Christian Gusenbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:24:30 -0000 On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:17 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Christian Gusenbauer wrote: >> Maybe it's hardware related? I experience the same slowness as you do as soon >> as I copy more than a few MB of data *on the same drive*. (...) > > Hello Christian :-) Thank you for your feedback! :-) There was no > problem today to copy from internal ufs2 to external ufs2, but I have > tried to copy back from external (ufs2) to internal (ufs2) and guess > what - I got the terrible slowdown!!! Just when I hit Ctrl+C things > get back to normal right away.. so the problem is with writing to the > WDC SATA drive... I also noticed that issue on a far more powerful machine and the WDC 2TB drive. At first I thought the drive was broken, then I switched from ext2 to ufs2 that improved efficiency to an acceptable level, but still it does not look as it should, maybe something wrong with the SATA(2) driver or the WDC drives :-) Glad to hear I am not alone, thanks!! :-) -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 12 21:32:25 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2AC264E; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:32:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pj@smo.de) Received: from mx01.ilk.net (mx01.ilk.net [212.86.193.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1752B3; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:32:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smo.de (p5B130316.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.19.3.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx01.ilk.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/ilk-relay) with ESMTP id r1CLK7JY007134 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:20:07 +0100 Received: from skjaldbreidur.intern.smo.de (skjaldbreidur.intern.smo.de [192.168.153.212]) by smo.de (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1CLK6g2020858; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:20:06 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <511AC154.80409@smo.de> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 22:25:24 +0000 From: Philipp-Joachim Ost User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:18.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/18.0 SeaMonkey/2.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: CeDeROM Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:32:26 -0000 CeDeROM wrote: > I have found 9.1 to be far more less responsive than 9.0 and previous > releases on my desktop. I have noted this slow down at 9.1-RC. I have > AMD64 4GB RAM i3 CPU and when I simply run Chromium, VBox with Windows > XP 64bit (1GB allocated) and VBox with Ubuntu 64bit (1GB allocated) my > machine gets unresponsive - it does not even respond to ACPI shutdown, > I need to kill it to get working again :-( I did not happen before. > > I have also noted that VBox 4.2.6 is working far more slower and makes > bigger impact on the whole host performance - sometimes I need to wait > some seconds to get the machine response back, this happens especially > at loading stage :-( I generally do not observe such a behaviour on my machine (AMD FX-6100, 8GB RAM) running 9.1-PRERELEASE amd64 from mid-november '12. The system is ZFS-only and equipped with a single WDC disk. I'm also running VBox 4.2.6 with Fedora Linux (64 bit) as guest; the virtual machine has 1.5GB RAM allocated. There was and is no delay in using the virtual machine. Even under heavy load (load level > 20) the system is interactive, that is, I can watch videos, surf the net, etc. without almost no hiccup. Only if memory is really scarce and I'm copying a large file (~7.5GB) the system becomes kind of slow, e.g. it takes some time to switch between different applications. Up to now, I didn't need to kill my machine to get it working again. HTH, Philipp From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 07:42:25 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A04A49 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:42:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from c47g@gmx.at) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF990FC2 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:42:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.30]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx002) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lrp0S-1V3aey0F2s-013g7u for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:42:18 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2013 07:42:17 -0000 Received: from cm56-168-232.liwest.at (EHLO bones.gusis.at) [86.56.168.232] by mail.gmx.net (mp030) with SMTP; 13 Feb 2013 08:42:17 +0100 X-Authenticated: #9978462 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18TtuAhTHwTptn/u+kl4Uk44id5y7DQd2Bhu7KICY ei5MCiBtAa8MhV From: Christian Gusenbauer To: CeDeROM Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:44:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/9.1-STABLE; KDE/4.8.4; amd64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:42:25 -0000 On Tuesday 12 February 2013 14:24:24 CeDeROM wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:17 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Christian Gusenbauer wrote: > >> Maybe it's hardware related? I experience the same slowness as you do as > >> soon as I copy more than a few MB of data *on the same drive*. (...) > > > > Hello Christian :-) Thank you for your feedback! :-) There was no > > problem today to copy from internal ufs2 to external ufs2, but I have > > tried to copy back from external (ufs2) to internal (ufs2) and guess > > what - I got the terrible slowdown!!! Just when I hit Ctrl+C things > > get back to normal right away.. so the problem is with writing to the > > WDC SATA drive... > > I also noticed that issue on a far more powerful machine and the WDC > 2TB drive. At first I thought the drive was broken, then I switched > from ext2 to ufs2 that improved efficiency to an acceptable level, but > still it does not look as it should, maybe something wrong with the > SATA(2) driver or the WDC drives :-) Glad to hear I am not alone, > thanks!! :-) Hi Tomek! Yeah, we're not alone anymore :-)! My external device is connected to a JMicron JMB363 AHCI SATA controller whereas my internal drive is connected to an Intel ICH8 AHCI SATA controller. As soon as I have some time I'll connect my new external drive to the Intel controller and have a look if that works or not. Maybe it's the combination Intel SATA controller and WDC drives? Ciao, Christian. From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 10:06:23 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F2BDCA; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:06:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qe0-f53.google.com (mail-qe0-f53.google.com [209.85.128.53]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3723E7DC; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:06:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 1so443557qee.26 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 02:06:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=FxJrMdw3+ZsG8TOFfKUIuCuX7ONmKdcow5PTklo1Nq8=; b=h5P/f3ZIFeGYhpi7jbm+I3ekgvx6OSYURWA8Ei2PO9NkNFfKnzlJfQ2gqOKE7ifMHT 5Q7Zz7wWFd54mNGp60CukriNgei7mMPN6LySkmc+23JIpeFDCDUBaK7OWTLXEfo7YjAR 82UIjaKG+whsKLNfd86M5wzExscwleCss0Q9s0qU7R7WOrVYIMYv4IwoDgQ3BT358cl2 DhnEDfb4B0bUDJZFPsp7PX68+iTBM1cOgk1A0PhOVw6ZX/kCGBnaQn+MwUglmX7wC7jO ANdDG9Neam1zrMQ+9jdiob6YLADDpj0FOCgR8ysEyfqkMqIFB85AxSw0828D6WWYhS6j N0MQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.105.73 with SMTP id gk9mr9564388qeb.40.1360749491737; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 01:58:11 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 01:58:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:58:11 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: NNXpLaEARPm0Be7x98yIf3cA4ns Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Christian Gusenbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:06:23 -0000 I am not sure if this is the case of external drive, it only helped us to figure out that problem is with writing to ICH SATA - WDC configuration. It was also slow in 9.0 I guess, this is why I have switched from Ext2 to UFS2 to get some speedup, so things are lets say acceptable for the Atari fan =) Maybe the configuration of buffering/cache is wrong and can be fixed easily with camcontrol but I have no experience with that, I have started poking a bit but it coredumped, and I am not really keen to misconfigura that drive and lose all data, so I prefer to wait for someone with experience to come into discussion :-) Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 10:24:16 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6104801; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:24:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f42.google.com (mail-qa0-f42.google.com [209.85.216.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 678FA909; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:24:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id cr7so2062180qab.15 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 02:24:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=TTfDorqNQ1DM3AAfoiDUIs5WBM80cS+ciuwU1KjUfxA=; b=khnLcB3WfKQKqaghRYEjFNQp364a++sYQMMFzKtvYIWMqiLQM2NYmWodU0/k7Ze9A4 T5jBFkxp87rIGzNvx3+eABEiTxZdN06F8RHju/HpnJyRVnB7Pe9AfGgx76EDLWe6+M9R HlCBgeS2UgkuNSNVjraW+jDc5qKdnrTrIFls7wV5WYYjNwjotPvAZL7m9zOshJ8K+nJU UGuW6LxXx7D7Jx36S1WSmqsO0yzQHIHnpFt3MTdzGSdgmAy7x59aOAQ16EOiZO/wJiCF 3UkdgPxjwif6PnCTCEwUbkMSGCrXKUFq0ZEaV5/hECbD5ng+vxA+CTqnKSHCYgdKaZAk Kl4A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.105.73 with SMTP id gk9mr9593707qeb.40.1360751050521; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 02:24:10 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 02:24:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:24:10 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: K9idk6CCDJvrgmfp6Cp1WnENUxA Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Christian Gusenbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:24:16 -0000 On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:58 AM, CeDeROM wrote: > I am not sure if this is the case of external drive, it only helped us > to figure out that problem is with writing to ICH SATA - WDC > configuration. Sorry, this is not exactly true - this happens on both Intel i5 equipment and AMD PhenomII x6 equipment. Both use SATA, both use WDC drives. -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 12:19:23 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F343396 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:19:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from c47g@gmx.at) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94863E55 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.34]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MARzI-1UBhBY0x10-00Bftv for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:19:22 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2013 12:19:22 -0000 Received: from cm56-168-232.liwest.at (EHLO bones.gusis.at) [86.56.168.232] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 13 Feb 2013 13:19:22 +0100 X-Authenticated: #9978462 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+fb5cWsWKfC4OzV4V99WyPBQmv8sEuyiW+8o004N bEnPpbaNkyKI0H From: Christian Gusenbauer To: CeDeROM Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:21:49 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/9.1-STABLE; KDE/4.8.4; amd64; ; ) References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201302131321.49429.c47g@gmx.at> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:19:24 -0000 On Wednesday 13 February 2013 10:58:11 CeDeROM wrote: > I am not sure if this is the case of external drive, it only helped us > to figure out that problem is with writing to ICH SATA - WDC > configuration. It was also slow in 9.0 I guess, this is why I have > switched from Ext2 to UFS2 to get some speedup, so things are lets say > acceptable for the Atari fan =) > > Maybe the configuration of buffering/cache is wrong and can be fixed > easily with camcontrol but I have no experience with that, I have > started poking a bit but it coredumped, and I am not really keen to > misconfigura that drive and lose all data, so I prefer to wait for > someone with experience to come into discussion :-) > > Best regards :-) > Tomek Hi! It has something to do with the drive. I've just connected my external drive to the Intel controller and copied some GB of data around without performance impacts! So my new WDC drive works on both the JMicron and the Intel controller. Now we definitely need some help :-)! Any clues? Thanks, Christian. From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 12:38:42 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECD356F8; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:38:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qe0-f52.google.com (mail-qe0-f52.google.com [209.85.128.52]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF69F38; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:38:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 6so508966qeb.11 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 04:38:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=PxlsrSlplCcUBo56caUwPhvNeLm73lR0At44gUvdx8U=; b=hv8mUMgAi3vswdMN9MokijwoN3wJlnqMEdoSGnMOr744PhUylGWHu142vkyCGf2N3R 1zhSpBkthRhthNgqQY7gQUv8xu2bVFNhZy4OndyuGeRen5VAZ4bX/UZQXDn8xtQKUrbl HTHpiArSA33AWWd7XR3w85hJ+xupXHn49VfBoTv9bhpxGMv14sv/vKAGE/2K/Ego7eeU 2pF5Vkf4+zwuiU1dKFn5oiQQL75BnjUn4ujT4SWeVzj//bZzM3SkOc8WouCZVNblwUFE cvP1xjk7IlfceK/T3B3szbM9X9kdvJdJjs60TyMEjpW66JHQgvPxR2ls1Y90uyYqni9W KNPQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.59.48 with SMTP id w16mr9395117qeq.38.1360758653407; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 04:30:53 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 04:30:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201302131321.49429.c47g@gmx.at> References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> <201302131321.49429.c47g@gmx.at> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:30:53 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: KZA7S0JeEuQdPv6t9mF7Pyf_Yro Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Christian Gusenbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:38:43 -0000 On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Christian Gusenbauer wrote: > It has something to do with the drive. I've just connected my external drive > to the Intel controller and copied some GB of data around without performance > impacts! So my new WDC drive works on both the JMicron and the Intel > controller. On the other hand these drivers work very well on other operating systems like WIndows and Linux, so I would rather suspect some SCSI/CAM/SATA issues on the FreeBSD side...? -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 13:04:26 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B1DD7C; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:04:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qe0-f41.google.com (mail-qe0-f41.google.com [209.85.128.41]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D7BF101; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:04:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 7so518697qeb.14 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:04:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=K7vMwPGCrVukN3qRJmNOF6LSFikfTaMaDY7Gf3bj49c=; b=hess7L6PLYzweFeDqIZ7UchQBeoSEunxzHueSV7wyaw6KbdSDTBPG0rhgPo5MtxZDd Mcthz8lr2y9Z44jc10WyNfdMo472UtUhHBDRQQD306Chty6ACs+FGQskpN6s2c2oWwOc R7FWud8dCV5m8VpKZJy1+VDmhJQ5YAW+Wy/ihMcOS9VowiVdm+5TnwHo7nzp0mmi3XsJ JlPk4+N2jUjeGJJdx/G3sgDJrWjcRJpXuD0N24F5lKtW8kdzULon7bnZdSNEZgcodjJv oPNlyk2+Bk3pq7HDNvTBKfGvSYIZIqbBZ4MCairIR89Bsb8cNClKj49zlLJFFTYFx99E Z18A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.177.14 with SMTP id bg14mr1991868qcb.51.1360760664491; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:04:24 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:04:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> <201302131321.49429.c47g@gmx.at> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:04:24 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AQmZrpt-P9PbXqjf6uFAvGiaZf4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Christian Gusenbauer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:04:26 -0000 Guys can you please check if you have HAL daemon running? When I switched it off my system got some hickups but is far more responsive.. maybe this is another cause? -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 13:48:02 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE048CD for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:48:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.org) Received: from qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe2d:43:76:96:30:16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622972F7 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:48:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta19.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.76]) by qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id zoz41k0071eYJf8A1po2is; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:48:02 +0000 Received: from koitsu.strangled.net ([67.180.84.87]) by omta19.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id zpo11k0061t3BNj01po1v4; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:48:02 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 481C973A1C; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:48:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 05:48:01 -0800 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: CeDeROM Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low Message-ID: <20130213134801.GA58535@icarus.home.lan> References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> <201302131321.49429.c47g@gmx.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1360763282; bh=zG7vPWmpEoQCwYJL1Peop5avoU5Zht7zLPKpoI5Mo5Y=; h=Received:Received:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=a+zJAMfIyqx5H534OU3UZHualfhJI3SrVDoq6E9iv8B4xoaIeSk+8SM3FNZFxSq2N Kp72pHfAuMgWZG62p5vfwOTBIIcuSXrWFcewGHjdMfoeO4dR4xwJih/u1aShE6v4Tw zsoRIoZbj4KJIfXIPns2kRXap5WSf4kW1i1uQmzw9WNHwv+lZfyhilJ31Vri8refek y/reABjBuiZiulbKrmt2nwZsuNIPaWS/QxW7E4pqf6K8YX7hms4ho+EOX/esCOSZqW H5jAiKDPIzi05HFcRPeu93gJLcrPlkVAOh6egHD9mtAZfsR42+WYqAbv1yS93EuVqG Jx8KqF70RGJ4A== Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, Christian Gusenbauer X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:48:02 -0000 On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 01:30:53PM +0100, CeDeROM wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Christian Gusenbauer wrote: > > It has something to do with the drive. I've just connected my external drive > > to the Intel controller and copied some GB of data around without performance > > impacts! So my new WDC drive works on both the JMicron and the Intel > > controller. > > On the other hand these drivers work very well on other operating > systems like WIndows and Linux, so I would rather suspect some > SCSI/CAM/SATA issues on the FreeBSD side...? I'm stepping in. This thread is officially pissing me off. I have read the thread. Every post. Repeatedly. I went back and read them all. Again: every one. I see all the nuances, all the stuff you're screwing with, all the stuff you're changing between posts. All I see are random, wild, insane claims of "SATA/AHCI/CAM issues" or "WDC disks have problems" or "maybe it's the Intel controller". Nobody until half way through the thread mentioned that USB was involved (heh heh heh...), nor did anyone disclose that the "system" in question was a laptop (it matters). Others with different setups are posting "me too!" yet their issue may be completely different. I see no actual useful data being posted either, just all sorts of vague statements; I find this very bizarre given that this is a UNIX OS and a UNIX-related mailing list, yet data is omitted. And now we have "are you running hald? Guys try shutting it off". Stop this madness. STOP IT. Stop being (what appears to be) hyperactive and sit down and actually FIGURE OUT when the issue begins for you. It will take you hours, if not an entire day, to do proper analysis of this. You will have to try numerous things -- and you will need to take very precise, very meticulous notes during each thing you do. You will have to reboot the machine numerous times, because filesystem caching may be causing you complications. Stop involving other hardware ("a more powerful machine"). Focus on ONE MACHINE, do not bring other things into the mix. Stop using ext2fs. Use UFS2, and state whether or not you're using SU, and/or SU+J. It matters. Provide dmesg output from the machine in question (straight off a fresh reboot), with the USB drive attached. Provide "pciconf -lvbc" output from that machine. Provide "gpart show" output for each drive. Provide SMART statistics for the hard disks involved (the USB one, as well as the internal one). ports/sysutils/smartmontools. smartctl -a output is what I want. If you can't get the data from the USB one (you may have to use "smartctl --scan" and try its flag recommendations), get a different USB enclosure that has a USB/SATA bridge that permits SMART pass-through. At some point (your choice -- come up with a plan!) take the USB drive out of the picture. Add a 2nd internal drive and try doing I/O to/from that instead. Figure it out. And finally -- start using "gstat -I500ms" in another VTY -- when using the system. This will give you some idea of the I/O workload that's going on, on a per-device level. If you see a device that should be getting, say, 150MBytes/second yet is only get 7MBytes/second, then that may be an indication of where to focus. If you want an example of a bug that took me an afternoon to track down, and a good 30-40 reboots and having to take audio recordings (pocket recorder) while performing physical tasks, just to figure out how to reproduce the problem, here you go: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2013-January/016324.html *That* is what is needed here. I am more than happy to help you analyse problems relating to hard disk performance -- I can assure you CAM/ahci(4) and related bits are in good shape, barring weird/bizarre chipset revision oddities (common with the mobile chipset versions, i.e. ICHxxM) -- but the information needs to be provided coherently. Take an afternoon to figure out what the commonality is. I can expand on all sorts of levels about hard disk performance, all the way down to PCB cache going bad or excessive ECC impacting things, but there's no point in speculating or going there until evidence shows that. And please, no "me too" posts. As said, each issue should be treated separately. Figure out where the commonality is through trial and error, then post those results here. Nobody can help when arms are flailing to this degree. Got it? -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@koitsu.org | | UNIX Systems Administrator http://jdc.koitsu.org/ | | Mountain View, CA, US | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP 4BD6C0CB | From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 14:15:46 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D556D4FC; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:15:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tomek.cedro@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qa0-f44.google.com (mail-qa0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 789986C5; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:15:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id bv4so2160154qab.10 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:15:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jo/UigzN+LDtJYsmL3+2acozLLPhnWUk3/ZgbkDOnw8=; b=WtCGvTsE60m3VE6bjX7H2oB0hkrNj/IWNcV/1f/1OvTVV3+kkvv+GpFNWgYdmIUmEa ZverajYCZrungvMfbX2yE6zUVvzVlBTf3j2XAGt0Cg47IufQM2ilkyH77TN87m4awMlm LXENS3/cHv9oVGYSuVBbp2v28uEiAnBE9lIn6CapfQGeGSyvHa2uOCgtbjItq7PkqUPT 4h4kGgadDC9Oxf6CAURbc0z1cfcB2ORtckyOPdJ8fkdriDRdRGKCm/J4+ACR4huZOWfB eAfcJQb6DNFjEzbfG/+k/lqaq3uY3tbx/g3ge5DPYd2XwbW1sexhhgp1Zz9OMeeT+ny5 gfog== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.173.67 with SMTP id o3mr1950532qcz.113.1360764935050; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:15:35 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.49.71.204 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:15:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20130213134801.GA58535@icarus.home.lan> References: <201302130844.45388.c47g@gmx.at> <201302131321.49429.c47g@gmx.at> <20130213134801.GA58535@icarus.home.lan> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:15:34 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: XfUQP_LOlBDqTZPetdxbJYkoVlI Message-ID: Subject: Re: 9.1 AMD64 multitasking efficiency low From: CeDeROM To: Jeremy Chadwick Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org, Christian Gusenbauer X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 14:15:46 -0000 Hello Jeremy :-) Thanks for your constructive critics :-) "Me too" is also important because it shows we do no hallucinate and the video shows the problem is real so we try to get common denominator :-) :-) I will be back from delegation this weekend and I will provide more useful data from both machines, please specify what input information can help you sort things out, as you can see we need some support on this :-) Thank you! :-) Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 14 22:22:17 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8606F2F for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 22:22:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@eitanadler.com) Received: from mail-pb0-f54.google.com (mail-pb0-f54.google.com [209.85.160.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9DE13A for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 22:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id rr4so339215pbb.13 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:22:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eitanadler.com; s=0xdeadbeef; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=ksB50Oqqp9tLdhXPHlLzVoQy/Bl4cxYzmeHzY3k0nqQ=; b=ByQpdaBRCjEUWvFGEiXJRbfJGJ2uYdDvxyYMavuMi8GBoPs4Thp+GU4tve3KJO/CWu ie5Ml7dObDq9oiEq7zB8Cz7NfPL0HpvZDgRr2XVJ8uQkG69dGQXVOGM0cGyvv6cDGPRR nCed8ZXsiqpAHmprD31PtcVLgna70ei8cjwKE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=ksB50Oqqp9tLdhXPHlLzVoQy/Bl4cxYzmeHzY3k0nqQ=; b=edK7t1wGA40Dxc5/04TKNqBQZ6efwNteddcl/lsvJYpkFLcw0aaGbYdhCT8+d5KMwn Pk0VmCygjTECMRrrOPf0ulPlz4PHw9PS+d8w1I/Jsy5a/oyY8u9FzTVz/5IBiwqMvxU2 R/aoNUQfUho0qZLjD6zG5oBY2Y/iaae01/Ex9WrqYaueFAN+KGTWeJRUG4cHWzCn7G3K tX0FZe3pt92DcNhyei8/RMR7xl9VuVGPkSUFTgg+k3YV2TulevWQrhthnRhoSlJVHnYe ivxIzSU2pBKjCKJPdTyq8WOngH74h5Cc1tcBASoVpuhMRmifJmo4gwV+Uuu772PL86YN HBVA== X-Received: by 10.68.189.169 with SMTP id gj9mr750146pbc.67.1360880536722; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:22:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.66.148.10 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:21:46 -0800 (PST) From: Eitan Adler Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:21:46 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: taking www/linux-f10-flashplugin11 To: emulation@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlhp1+UHAlSpnccqo1ciZssfgkjv6hhauFD0UR4MRXzAovWIKtfSkMrAMoAwdv+1OBtKeIl X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 22:22:17 -0000 Hey all, I tend to track this port, test it, and update it as appropriate. Would anyone object to me taking maintainer-ship and I'd like to receive PRs about it and gets a heads up before it is changed significantly? -- Eitan Adler From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 20:17:51 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 317F22E7 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 20:17:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r.c.ladan@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com (wi-in-x0229.1e100.net [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD2E8263 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 20:17:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id l13so1815032wie.2 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:17:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=k25MZVqhSsBfqt/WRBRsfEdLeKXMSbkZexopkuhu35s=; b=ngxEaxeHh+uACQIT9M6cLi1Hj+HuxMuccvBgJdzS9h+l9PhsJS7bS+lipnwQjaenGr jWnjklgofJtSju0Ct0UWkxqU37kn1ufxA1xc/u24xlT/+0NQ8bFSN0ZfqvWB8/2auvMl O2MU3VePatbO04VhP0nJZFcAnmc7ovgaV+xbj2V+kgOfzlhKri0m6pAmEMGsDMRq7bab /V6tXU7Z2UhqgfBDlB5EK7dJeUd9RZ/5KyENPiXdPBt9IXfcdzJsscardwIwPhtZ+SOL LG66NeYFfkX1l4VbJ/KlTJGqnmvXX8txJGMJ4EO/TsOWmuf4rqHcm0eyy1HFFhms5ec9 Q81Q== X-Received: by 10.194.76.37 with SMTP id h5mr6777194wjw.21.1360959469952; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.178.20] (a82-161-212-209.adsl.xs4all.nl. [82.161.212.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gy2sm7401937wib.3.2013.02.15.12.17.48 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:17:48 -0800 (PST) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9_Ladan?= Message-ID: <511E97E4.40501@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 21:17:40 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ren=E9_Ladan?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130129 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: emulation@freebsd.org Subject: deprecating/removing www/linux-flashplugin9 X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------000109080107060707060008" X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 20:17:51 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000109080107060707060008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, I like to deprecate and eventually remove www/linux-flashplugin9 since it is unfetchable and has security problems. Attached is a proposed patch. Regards, René --------------000109080107060707060008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; name="linux-flashplugin9.diff" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="linux-flashplugin9.diff" Index: Makefile =================================================================== --- Makefile (revision 312281) +++ Makefile (working copy) @@ -23,6 +23,12 @@ BROKEN= unfetchable +FORBIDDEN= CVE-2010-1297 +# http://www.adobe.com/support/security/advisories/apsa10-01.html + +DEPRECATED= Vulnerable, BROKEN for more than six months +EXPIRATION_DATE= 2013-04-01 + ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= amd64 i386 USE_LINUX= yes USE_LINUX_APPS= openssl gtk2 @@ -37,7 +43,8 @@ USE_NPAPI= linux-* NPAPI_FILES= libflashplayer.so -CONFLICTS= linux-flashplugin-7* linux-f8-flashplugin-10* linux-f10-flashplugin-10* +CONFLICTS= linux-flashplugin-7* linux-f8-flashplugin-10* \ + linux-f10-flashplugin-10* linux-f10-flashplugin-11* post-install: @${INSTALL_PROGRAM} ${DISTDIR}/${DIST_SUBDIR}/libflashsupport.so ${LINUXBASE}/usr/lib --------------000109080107060707060008-- From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 15 20:22:07 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB5E3378 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 20:22:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@eitanadler.com) Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com (mail-pb0-f41.google.com [209.85.160.41]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3816293 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 20:22:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id um15so748175pbc.0 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:22:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eitanadler.com; s=0xdeadbeef; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5nKOTuhKmlqvyS9RQ5G14vHPTQP1NDLy8j/a9/OshwQ=; b=ZlqAnjuKjhfIPHorEQYYzdqkrcSkBdGrf5XGQi5BYUbkZA4M3pdU9jf0j3cRqHWT8W VFxAnYjWaPx9VAjRknFjNVFyXaulQITNOI3lfArCgh+bDGcpvhXL5S5N17V7ct0F3Teh Nds5RITYVnC+pJSXenJrsDHB8yz3lbsJdvX9U= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=5nKOTuhKmlqvyS9RQ5G14vHPTQP1NDLy8j/a9/OshwQ=; b=iT/RXriOl6xrfJzAWxTxRq6LChoAyrmvy+S+IqRII9Z4uej3AKUb7sjrtGkmPenZX9 pZNYXwY2wlJmL2SNN+phERFCHbMeOxO2CUPSUZtDlcupPzn414x1DHCKrHl0bAsSb1lX iqTMXO1zQUn9FREUNIQm0cZqtWEQnFa5OAQ2ilYzitFau09KR9iEk2FKze2+YC9Q8Sj7 nAiEQSIdWNx7+9/+RkGZ0pCUuPvYJbgfpIBD62zf9rb7QLcUVpHij5V1AmWQTKCXNI3d FqSbWhRACWw6XhaOorm7ejv8oSMmfnc8q7swBsmVa9SgyIEvx8ppZ7/f79DGeZ0mRgTb Tcvw== X-Received: by 10.68.4.97 with SMTP id j1mr8690952pbj.157.1360959720980; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:22:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.66.148.10 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:21:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <511E97E4.40501@freebsd.org> References: <511E97E4.40501@freebsd.org> From: Eitan Adler Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:21:30 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: deprecating/removing www/linux-flashplugin9 To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9_Ladan?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl9eQHq794w/TQEmhmyUC6Role7ZiaWgkk6eBFtwF9CgoDZiSiMPJyhnW0Lk4eEA0APh1HH Cc: emulation@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 20:22:07 -0000 On 15 February 2013 15:17, Ren=C3=A9 Ladan wrote: > Hi, > > I like to deprecate and eventually remove www/linux-flashplugin9 since > it is unfetchable and has security problems. Attached is a proposed patc= h. Please go ahead. Approved with hat. ;) --=20 Eitan Adler From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 16 09:27:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C493C48C for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:27:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com) Received: from shell0.rawbw.com (shell0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F541B2 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:27:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eagle.yuri.org (stunnel@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell0.rawbw.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1G9RXge018151 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 01:27:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com) Message-ID: <511F5105.6050005@rawbw.com> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 01:27:33 -0800 From: Yuri User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130129 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: emulation@freebsd.org Subject: VBox: USB devices can't be shared with VMs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 09:27:40 -0000 One or two months ago it was possible to share USB devices with VMs, even if with some glitches. But now USB button only displays the message: "No USB devices connected" Was this disabled deliberately? virtualbox-ose-4.2.6 9.1 Yuri From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 16 11:14:11 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F238353B; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 11:14:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from naylor.b.david@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ea0-f182.google.com (mail-ea0-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E47067F; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 11:14:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ea0-f182.google.com with SMTP id a12so1801864eaa.41 for ; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 03:14:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=q4IGcrvdqBT0CBgbv8GL6uM2Ndp7lVfnZKnzGe64Qqk=; b=g2Bk6dDERpxRSbUc5uVwRP1cFizTF1UdSYqXHFZ96qqtYXf5PJrmG5G8Sasetfxlk9 8hy68fiwzw4Au9mYHPOgGvUqrnQN9zhfrYjWyRUKs8EYfE59j8qK84phkLyjrygxdnWY wXX8d5X1vdYSa+h+fkTK0TanOAc8QwHePZl1VCg4HUGXOljDFudX3IoIQuSE4VFSw/Ke ZKG0AXm15sG4WmyzB84qPURMhP2d7rrsUSSLK0DhIfERKyoRZ5z8ErsT6bO3IzVHl9MO uf0g6Vo6Yz/uW8NbJRnzLSmAcN30I+8RosAaKqE/HJ46sJTR01lBLKWZ+AqPO/z0PkkM ZMVA== X-Received: by 10.14.216.198 with SMTP id g46mr19433850eep.30.1361013243227; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 03:14:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragon.dg ([197.87.102.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k7sm85324919een.8.2013.02.16.03.13.59 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 16 Feb 2013 03:14:02 -0800 (PST) From: David Naylor To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Wine-fbsd64 updated to 1.5.24 (32bit Wine for 64bit FreeBSD) Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 13:13:35 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/9.1-RELEASE; KDE/4.9.1; amd64; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart6673699.uL9ibrYxHk"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201302161313.53916.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 11:14:11 -0000 --nextPart6673699.uL9ibrYxHk Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Packages [1] for wine-fbsd64-1.5.24 have been uploaded to mediafire [2]. T= he=20 packages for FreeBSD 10 use the pkgng [3] format. =20 Please read the installation messages, if you use the nVidia graphics drive= r,=20 for further information. =20 =46AQ =2D-- Q: Wine crashing when launching some 3D programs (aka games) A: This appears to be some clash with software however I have not been able= to=20 isolate where the problem is occurring (wine, ports, world, kernel, i386,=20 amd64). A possible solution in to try upgrading, or downgrading, software= =20 used however I have not been able to fix the problem with my attempts. If = you=20 find a solution please email me, or post the solution on the mailing list. Q: wine: failed to initialize: / usr/local/lib32/wine/ntdll.dll.so: Undefin= ed symbol "_ThreadRuneLocale" A: This problem is specific to FreeBSD-9.0, please either stick with=20 wine-1.5.10 or update to a newer version of FreeBSD (-STABLE or 9.1). =20 Apologies for the inconvenience. =20 Q: Creating pkgng packages for FreeBSD-9 A: When there is no demand for FreeBSD-8 packages I'll create additional pk= gng=20 packages for FreeBSD-9. Since it is possible to install the existing pkg=20 packages in a pkgng environment (which I do) this is not a high priority. = =20 Q: Wine doesn't run (properly) with a clang built world A: Clang was compiling i386 on a 16-byte boundary while gcc was using a 4-b= yte=20 boundary. To fix, recompile world after ensuring your sources include=20 http://beta.freshbsd.org/commit/freebsd/r242835 or the relevant MFC. =20 Regards, David [1] MD5 (wine-1.5.x-freebsd8/wine-fbsd64-1.5.24,1.tbz) =3D=20 7a69ce1f152ef9e5e1ad35e022bb4683 MD5 (wine-1.5.x-freebsd9/wine-fbsd64-1.5.24.1.txz) =3D=20 18bd09208f4e983e9495b33d9fdadaae MD5 (wine-1.5.x-freebsd10/wine-fbsd64-1.5.24,1.txz) =3D=20 86361cc8b023d762f5e42a8fb226f5fe [2] http://www.mediafire.com/wine_fbsd64 [3] http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng --nextPart6673699.uL9ibrYxHk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAlEfafEACgkQUaaFgP9pFrJMVgCbBHWx2cIZ5L68hSh9xew6DmCf b18An2M8ru8U8Kpm6pWVOqceatjUNyBX =kems -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart6673699.uL9ibrYxHk--