From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 15 07:00:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2219116A424 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 07:00:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E542D43D5E for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 07:00:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4F70oEd055881 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 07:00:50 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k4F70o0L055880; Mon, 15 May 2006 07:00:50 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 07:00:50 GMT Message-Id: <200605150700.k4F70o0L055880@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Lukas Razik Cc: Subject: Re: kern/93885: ata(4) failure: SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE semaphore timeout !! DANGER Will Robinson !! X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Lukas Razik List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 07:00:58 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/93885; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Lukas Razik To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, jspence@lightconsulting.com, sos@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Subject: Re: kern/93885: ata(4) failure: SETFEATURES SET TRANSFER MODE semaphore timeout !! DANGER Will Robinson !! Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 08:44:15 +0200 Hello! I think I've the malefactor. I've compiled a new kernel without additional optimizations which I had before: makeoptions COPTFLAGS="-O2 -pipe -funroll-loops -ffast-math" I've restarted the system more times and generated high IO over more hours and I hadn't any warnings... Now I'll try to figure out which of these options causes the "bug" and if it also works with SCHED_ULE. Because with SCHED_ULE and all above-mentioned optimizations I had more warnings than with SCHED_4BSD and the same optimizations. Regards, Lukas