From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 8 16:24:42 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B785216A404 for ; Mon, 8 May 2006 16:24:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2992A43D69 for ; Mon, 8 May 2006 16:24:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Fd8X5-0002ep-Hj for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Mon, 08 May 2006 18:24:27 +0200 Received: from dialin-145-254-130-250.pools.arcor-ip.net ([145.254.130.250]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 May 2006 18:24:27 +0200 Received: from HM-Gerhards by dialin-145-254-130-250.pools.arcor-ip.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 May 2006 18:24:27 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org From: Michael Gerhards Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 18:23:41 +0200 Lines: 47 Message-ID: References: <55123.193.138.135.19.1146922482.squirrel@sigma.interami.com> <1pqui3-v11.ln1@hmg.homeunix.net> <445EF61D.3060009@datalinktech.com.au> X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-130-250.pools.arcor-ip.net User-Agent: tin/1.8.0-20051224 ("Ronay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/6.0-RELEASE (i386)) Sender: news Subject: Re: problem with sk? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 16:24:42 -0000 David Nugent wrote: > >>But by browsing through this list I found the thread "sk0: watchdog timeout" >>and the problem described there is quite similiar to what I get here. So >>perhaps this bug in the sk driver is also the cause for my trouble here?! > > Possibly (and even likely). It sounds like a very severe case of the > same thing. I should add that the system was under quite heavy load doing an "portupgrade". Perhaps that triggered the problem a bit, too. >>Can I somehow use this patch for sk0 _without_ changing everything to >>-current? Acutually, I wanted to stay to 6.1-RELEASE... >> >> > Apparently the timeout problem is fixed in -CURRENT, and will be merged > after 6.1-RELEASE. Enjoy. Sounds good to me. I guess this won't be more than a few days, perhaps 1-2 weeks?! > Tracking -STABLE is a Good Thing, IMHO, quite aside from the security > updates, bugs which don't even affect you right now (but may do > sometime) get fixed, and the -STABLE tag tends to be quite appropriate. I am quite new to FreeBSD and so I am not that familiar with all these things. But I read at some places that -STABLE is not always really stable and should not be used on productive systems. So I thought -RELEASE might be the correct choice for me. But I see your arguments - perhaps I will change my mind and really track -STABLE. > I only ever used -RELEASE media for the initial install. A system I run > at home was originally installed from FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT, also now > running a mid-Feb 6.1-PRERELEASE, upgraded from sources many many times > over (build world+kernel takes just under 3 days). :-) ;-) On my Pentium2-300 I certainly will not upgrade that often... ;-) But on my other machinese (Athlon XP 2600+, Athlon 64 X2 3800+) building world and kernel is not that time-consumpting any more... :-) Michael