Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 19:38:58 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: Masoom Shaikh <masoom.shaikh@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: random FreeBSD panics Message-ID: <9bbcef731003281038x33b8a9atc2a81d22aa26468@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <b10011eb1003280742i3d45b14bu6492328ce5bc745a@mail.gmail.com> References: <b10011eb1003280128k4034e667v1377205888e7a2d@mail.gmail.com> <honb8m$ncu$1@dough.gmane.org> <b10011eb1003280418l2038c651saf0d09fc48ab3966@mail.gmail.com> <9bbcef731003280503q4993e5b4ud8d874b8e9c376a9@mail.gmail.com> <b10011eb1003280742i3d45b14bu6492328ce5bc745a@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28 March 2010 16:42, Masoom Shaikh <masoom.shaikh@gmail.com> wrote: > lets assume if this is h/w problem, then how can other OSes overcome > this ? is there a way to make FreeBSD ignore this as well, let it > result in reasonable performance penalty. Very probably, if only we could detect where the problem is. Try adding "options PRINTF_BUFR_SIZE=128" to the kernel configuration file if you can, to see if you can get a less mangled log outout.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef731003281038x33b8a9atc2a81d22aa26468>