headers
Izumi Tsutsui | 1 Dec 2008 15:11
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Qube2 with release-5 hangs, wapbl problem?

acruhl <at> gmail.com wrote:

> The system becomes generally unresponsive. I can't issue commands. My
> VNC desktop is still visible over the network, I can type in a
> terminal but as soon as I execute a command that terminal is hung. I
> can't start a new one to issue more commands.
> 
> I have a serial console, but I can't log in with it once the system is hung.
> 
> I'm not hugely interested in debugging it at this point, but I can
> probably do it in the next few weeks or so. What should I do? Maybe
> set it to panic when I connect via the serial console or something?

- try the latest 5.0_BETA kernel from ftp.NetBSD.org://pub/NetBSD-daily/
- try to send BREAK via serial console at freeze (to get ddb(4) console)
- try a custom kernel with options DIAGNOSTIC or DEBUG
etc?

> My next step is to see if it's safe to remove the log option from the
> fstab and reboot. Then I'll see if it hangs again.

As far as I tried on i386, it's safe if the file system
was properly unmounted on the previous shutdown.
---
Izumi Tsutsui
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Andy Ruhl | 1 Dec 2008 15:17
Picon

Re: Qube2 with release-5 hangs, wapbl problem?

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui <at> ceres.dti.ne.jp> wrote:
> As far as I tried on i386, it's safe if the file system
> was properly unmounted on the previous shutdown.

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui <at> ceres.dti.ne.jp> wrote:
> As far as I tried on i386, it's safe if the file system
> was properly unmounted on the previous shutdown.

So far, since I stopped using the "log" option in the fstab, the
machine has not hung for a few days now.

I have not been using the kernels from the NetBSD-daily stuff, I have
been doing a cvs update from netbsd-5 every day and when I need a
kernel, I build it from there. I did see the extra debug options in
the wapbl man page, I will add those and try again.

I rebooted the machine a few times when I was getting the hangs, so
the previous boot and mount of the filesystem should have been clean.

Thanks Izumi.

Andy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Brian McEwen | 4 Dec 2008 00:21
Picon

adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?


Hi all;

Would you expect that I could see better network performance from my  
Qube2 if I put a NIC in my lonely expansion slot?
If so, which chipset?

I have a USB card in there now, but I never use it.

I though I would be making use of the wonderful new install CDs, at  
least the latest 4.0, over the holidays-- but I had too many  
distractions.

Thanks for thoughts-

Brian
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Mike Hebel | 4 Dec 2008 00:25

Re: adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?


On Dec 3, 2008, at 5:21 PM 12/3/08, Brian McEwen wrote:

>
> Hi all;
>
> Would you expect that I could see better network performance from  
> my Qube2 if I put a NIC in my lonely expansion slot?
> If so, which chipset?
>
> I have a USB card in there now, but I never use it.
>
> I though I would be making use of the wonderful new install CDs, at  
> least the latest 4.0, over the holidays-- but I had too many  
> distractions.
>
> Thanks for thoughts-

That's a very good question - would a gigbit card work well?  I would  
think that the CPU and pci bus would be the bottleneck in this case  
but I honestly don't know.
--
Mike Hebel

In the end the journey only matters if you've helped someone along  
the way.
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Alex Pelts | 4 Dec 2008 00:45
Favicon

Re: adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?

Tulip in the cube is a good enough chip. I don't think processor can
saturate 100MB connection not even talking about a gigabit. IMHO the
existing ethernet is underutilized as it is. On clear transfers I am
barely getting 2MBytes/sec speed and on encrypted less than half of
that. I can get faster speed between my pc and my laptop over 802.11B
wireless.

Regards,
Alex

Mike Hebel wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2008, at 5:21 PM 12/3/08, Brian McEwen wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi all;
>>
>> Would you expect that I could see better network performance from  
>> my Qube2 if I put a NIC in my lonely expansion slot?
>> If so, which chipset?
>>
>> I have a USB card in there now, but I never use it.
>>
>> I though I would be making use of the wonderful new install CDs, at  
>> least the latest 4.0, over the holidays-- but I had too many  
>> distractions.
>>
>> Thanks for thoughts-
>>     
>
> That's a very good question - would a gigbit card work well?  I would
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Andy Ruhl | 4 Dec 2008 01:43
Picon

Re: adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Brian McEwen <bmcewen <at> comcast.net> wrote:
> Would you expect that I could see better network performance from my Qube2
> if I put a NIC in my lonely expansion slot?
> If so, which chipset?
>
> I have a USB card in there now, but I never use it.

Apparently there is a limitation on bandwidth the PCI bus can handle
with NetBSD. Adding a card probably won't help.

Andy
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Izumi Tsutsui | 4 Dec 2008 15:25
Picon
Gravatar

Re: release-5 restorecd issue

I wrote:

> I'll prepare fixed one in this weekend,
> but you could try the attached patch:

Sorry for delay (daily builds for i386 failed on 20081126 and 20081129),
but I've updated 5.0_BETA restorecd based on 20081202 snapshot:
ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/arch/cobalt/restore-cd/5.0_BETA

The restorecd specific changes are only /tmp permission issue (untested)
and some minor document updates.

5.0_BETA generic updates/fixes can be found here:
ftp://ftp.NetBSD.org/pub/NetBSD/NetBSD-5_BETA/src/doc/CHANGES-5.0
http://cvsweb.NetBSD.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/doc/Attic/CHANGES-5.0
http://releng.NetBSD.org/cgi-bin/req-5.cgi?status=resolved

---
Izumi Tsutsui
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Izumi Tsutsui | 4 Dec 2008 15:38
Picon
Gravatar

Re: adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?

acruhl <at> gmail.com wrote:

> Apparently there is a limitation on bandwidth the PCI bus can handle
> with NetBSD. Adding a card probably won't help.

BTW, is there any other OS which gets better result on cobalt?

Anyway, NICs which have hardware checksums support
(like 3c905B/C, or most gigabit card) might improve
performance a bit.

i82540 with wm(4) on Qube2700 shows:
---
# dmesg|grep wm0
wm0 at pci0 dev 10 function 0: Intel i82540EM 1000BASE-T Ethernet, rev. 2
wm0: interrupting at irq 9
wm0: 32-bit 33MHz PCI bus
wm0: 64 word (6 address bits) MicroWire EEPROM
wm0: Ethernet address 00:07:f6:6a:5d:1c
makphy0 at wm0 phy 1: Marvell 88E1011 Gigabit PHY, rev. 3
---

Without ip4csum/tcp4csum:
---
# ifconfig wm0 -ip4csum -tcp4csum -udp4csum
# ttcp -ts 192.168.20.1
ttcp-t: buflen=8192, nbuf=2048, align=16384/0, port=5001  tcp  -> 192.168.20.1
ttcp-t: socket
ttcp-t: connect
ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in 6.80 real seconds = 2409.97 KB/sec +++
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Andy Ruhl | 4 Dec 2008 16:07
Picon

Re: adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui <at> ceres.dti.ne.jp> wrote:
> Don't complain about ~25M speed on 1G card ;-p

Ok, I guess I was wrong. I was thinking there was some inherent
problem with the PCI bus that was causing this, from earlier
conversations on this list.

I have an ex card I'll try.

Andy
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Izumi Tsutsui | 4 Dec 2008 16:16
Picon
Gravatar

Re: adding NIC to Qube2- performance better?

acruhl <at> gmail.com wrote:

> Ok, I guess I was wrong. I was thinking there was some inherent
> problem with the PCI bus that was causing this, from earlier
> conversations on this list.

I think the Galileo PCI is still bottleneck on cobalt.
SGI O2 running NetBSD/sgimips with 180MHz R5000
(but also with 512KB L2 cache) can saturate 100Mbps enough
even without hardware cksum support.

> I have an ex card I'll try.

Note only 905B and later cards have hwcksum support.
---
Izumi Tsutsui
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane