From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Feb 13 13:30:10 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6E337B401 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 13:30:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.laposte.net (mx.laposte.net [213.30.181.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87AB643F93 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 13:30:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from yvon.quere@laposte.net) Received: from laposte.net (127.0.0.1) by mx.laposte.net (6.0.053) id 3E493E4B0005E5B1 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:30:03 +0100 Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:30:03 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_5.0-RELEASE_under_VMWare_3_:_slowdown_and_even_hangup?= MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sensitivity: 3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?yvon.quere@laposte.net?=" To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?freebsd-questions?=" X-XaM3-API-Version: 3.2 R29 (B54 pl1) X-type: 0 X-SenderIP: 213.245.48.190 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi there everyone=0D=0A=0D=0AAt 10:51 AM +0100 2/13/03, yvon.quere@lapost= e.net wrote:=0D=0A>You will find an option called CPU_DISABLE_CMPXCHG=0D=0A= =0D=0AI read that one and didn't read (my newbie fault) that it was =0D=0A= so closely related to VMWare.=0D=0A=0D=0A>I realize you then have the pro= blem of how to compile the new=0D=0A>kernel when it takes so long to do a= nything with the standard=0D=0A>GENERIC kernel. Perhaps it would go bett= er if you booted up =0D=0A>in=0D=0A>single-user mode, and then compiled a= nd installed the new =0D=0A>kernel.=0D=0A=0D=0AThat's a good idea, even i= f I'm not sure single user would =0D=0Amake a difference. I imagine that = the same machine code is =0D=0Abeing called when doing a make depend, mak= e, cc & stuff.=0D=0A=0D=0AMy short term method has been (all day long) to= reboot the =0D=0Aguest os from time to time (when things get slow, but b= efore =0D=0Athings get *BLOCKED*) and relaunch the build procedure.=0D=0A= =0D=0AHowever, this is quite difficult and cumbersome to achieve.=0D=0A=0D= =0AI, for sure, would have preferred a sysctl option if I =0D=0Aunderstan= d that it is far too low level for this.=0D=0A=0D=0AIn the end, compiling= a new kernel on a non-VMWare host sounds =0D=0Ainteresting but might sou= nd "bizarre" when using the VMWare-do-=0D=0Anot-need-new-hardware-to-try-= new-OS approach.=0D=0A=0D=0AMy new kernel build is not over right now and= I'll probably =0D=0Afind it blocked tomorrow morning because of no reboo= t :(=0D=0A=0D=0AThanks for your help anyway, and sorry for the RTFM glitc= h ;-)=0D=0A=0D=0AYvon=0A=0AAcc=E9dez au courrier =E9lectronique de La Pos= te : www.laposte.net ; =0A3615 LAPOSTENET (0,13 =80/mn) ; t=E9l : 08 92 6= 8 13 50 (0,34=80/mn)"=0A=0A To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message