Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Jul 2018 12:09:51 -0700
From:      bob prohaska <fbsd@www.zefox.net>
To:        Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>
Cc:        freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: RPI3 swap experiments
Message-ID:  <20180718190951.GB27481@www.zefox.net>
In-Reply-To: <F31DD1B5-42A8-4A48-A771-D38479604FD5@yahoo.com>
References:  <20180629233937.GC35717@www.zefox.net> <0f137e06-214a-3e8c-a216-f061ec04ac2c@sentry.org> <20180630005145.GA43801@www.zefox.net> <6f3406e2-71f3-d0c2-2b65-703e1a1d3c25@sentry.org> <8e92b2b7-da61-3efb-7231-9fac76b2c1d4@sentry.org> <ba33d8a7-a849-3893-8016-0765ebe1c51f@sentry.org> <2deaaec3-f78f-0b09-5ca7-27e14c6979f9@sentry.org> <20180704004554.GA61273@www.zefox.net> <20180718060650.GA24566@www.zefox.net> <F31DD1B5-42A8-4A48-A771-D38479604FD5@yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 07:42:13AM -0700, Mark Millard wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2018-Jul-17, at 11:06 PM, bob prohaska <fbsd at www.zefox.net> wrote:
> 
> > It appears that some progress has been made in getting swap working reasonably
> > on the RPI3. A -j4 buildworld attempt running r336356 to compile 336431 failed
> > with "out of swap" but the worst read and write delays were less than 5 seconds,
> > a marked improvement over previous examples.
> 
> Attributing the time variations that have been observed mostly to FreeBSD and not
> mostly to the device at issue seems to have little or no evidence to support it.
> 
Possibly a fair objection. This test is with a USB3.0 flash drive. I'll repeat soon
as possible with a USB3.1 device, which in the past reported much greater (15 second)
delays.

> > In this case swap was split, 2 each 1GB  partitions on USB flash plus 1 GB on the 
> > microSD card. Previous attempts using 3 each 1 GB partitions on USB flash have been
> > repeatedly successful, while a single attempt using 3 each 1GB partitions on microSD
> > failed.
> 
> The more swap partitions (or space?) not on a /dev/mmcsd0s* the less of the
> activity that /dev/mmcsd0 handles and likely the more time it tends to have
> between explicit operations to do internal housekeeping before the next
> explicit operation.
> 
> So the better approximation to not using /dev/mmcsd0 at all might not be
> all that much of a surprise at having less of a problem on the device
> (or a problem less often).
> 
In earlier tests (same card type) putting _all_ swap on microSD (along with /tmp) 
avoided OOMA kills. Dependable mischief seems to come when swap is on both microSD 
and USB.

It's understood that USB and Ethernet share I/O hardware, but I thought microSD 
was at least somewhat independent. Is this wrong?

Thanks for reading,

bob prohaska




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180718190951.GB27481>