Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:50:12 +1100 (EST) From: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> To: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>, Ronald Klop <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org> Subject: Re: Increasing the DMESG buffer.... Message-ID: <20121123150719.M21191@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1sK3U=18ovFYPAViuMxTDCm2qZ-msLmM7Zgymx=u6ga4w@mail.gmail.com> References: <50AD0E82.3070706@digiware.nl> <20121121194142.8c4bf7d1977f13801a021ccc@getmail.no> <op.wn4141f88527sy@212-182-167-131.ip.telfort.nl> <CAJ-VmomREO6uj_izmD%2Bp90cFn=AQcz7UbZNkX8PVnU5mG_8ufQ@mail.gmail.com> <20121122144400.M21191@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <CAJ-Vmonk2RS=FwpgVHpeuFF5jf%2BSjE2Hv8kOFBrDCkv-=hTYSg@mail.gmail.com> <20121122213328.J21191@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <50AE36FF.7080106@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-Vmo=UOTu0KG6yHjZ_gBB4HGSGNJOAhn3HT-8gNsh_=ih7Yg@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1v1AdhgqQfONbDAEueU2wnFZDO8GvegRzq10y0yoj8kDg@mail.gmail.com> <20121122224906.GE88593@in-addr.com> <CAN6yY1sK3U=18ovFYPAViuMxTDCm2qZ-msLmM7Zgymx=u6ga4w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:20:52 -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 02:14:59PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> > On 22 November 2012 06:30, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Neither ICH, nor any other driver I know have amount of information > >> >> comparable to what HDA hardware provides. So the analogy is not good. > >> >> Respecting that most CODECs have no published datasheets, that information > >> >> is the only input for debugging. > >> >> > >> >> snd_hda also uses hw.snd.verbose=3. But it is used for even deeper driver > >> >> debugging. It also enables a lot of debugging in sound(4), that can be too > >> >> verbose for HDA debugging. > >> >> > >> >> I will recheck again how can it be reorganized, but I think that the real > >> >> problem is not in HDA. We need some way to structure and filter the output. > >> > > >> > I honestly would like to just see it spat out using a userland tool, > >> > rather than having the kernel print that level of topology data out. > >> > > >> > It's highly unlikely that a topology problem is going to cause a > >> > system to not boot, right? So the kernel itself doesn't need to be > >> > able to spit that data out. > >> > >> Maybe I'm missing something, but the data needed to adjust HDAC is > >> available from 'sysctl dev.hdaa'. I have not looked at the verbose > >> output in quite a while, but I think it is mstly or entirely hte > >> information in that and 'sysctl dev.hdac'. I never needed to look > >> elsewhere to get mine set up properly. Kevin, could you check http://bsd-geek.de/FreeBSD/T61_dmesg.boot.10.works - the ~85k example I used - against what the sysctl presents on yours? With the caveat that I don't have a snd_hda, I suspect the initial information from hdacc0 and hdaa0 up to before "DUMPING HDA NODES" is likely useful in verbose boot, assuming all of the nid info is available by sysctl? Also the pcm0 and pcm1 data might be limited to that without "DUMPING PCM Playback/Record Channels", "DUMPING Playback/Record Paths" and "DUMPING Volume Controls", leaving in the mixer info as traditional - again assuming that sysctl access covers it? Clearly basic discovery of the particular wiring, routing etc should remain in verbose dmesg. > >> Also, isn't the entire verbose boot captured in /var/run/dmesg? > > > > Only if the message buffer hasn't overflowed before the utility runs to > > populate the file > > Ouch! I did miss hte obvious. Thanks for pointing this out. I've noticed quite a few truncated verbose dmesgs posted over the last couple of years, sometimes frustratingly starting after important stuff like the CPU info or ACPI tables etc .. Lars presumably had increased his buffer size to capture 85k, which would be well less than Adrian's suggested 64k with more minimal hda + pcm logging. Perhaps a debug.snd. or something tunable could reenable the higher verbosity if/when needed? > So we need to either expand the default buffer (not something I would > want to do) or trim the verbosity of the verbose boot. > > Am I also missing an obvious reason most of the HDA output could not > be eliminated since it is available y sysctl? It would be useful to know just which of it is available that way. cheers, Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121123150719.M21191>