From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 19 21:32:24 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC8AC16A41C for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:32:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from toa@pop.agri.ch) Received: from smtp.messaging.ch (exsmtp02.agrinet.ch [81.221.252.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61CCC43D1F for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:32:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from toa@pop.agri.ch) Received: from [192.168.225.5] ([80.218.0.93]) by smtp.messaging.ch with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:32:22 +0200 Message-ID: <42B5E462.7090501@pop.agri.ch> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:32:18 +0200 From: Andreas Tobler User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Emmerton References: <20050617180321.GA1131@tarc.po.cs.msu.su> <867jgskfvd.fsf@xps.des.no><20050618105622.GA723@tarc.po.cs.msu.su><86k6krg0z5.fsf@xps.des.no> <42B5D82E.2090509@pop.agri.ch> <001b01c57513$9e9265b0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> In-Reply-To: <001b01c57513$9e9265b0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jun 2005 21:32:22.0412 (UTC) FILETIME=[60D354C0:01C57516] Cc: Tarc , =?UTF-8?B?77+9?= , freebsd-current Subject: Re: -CURRENT crashes on compilling X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:32:25 -0000 Matt Emmerton wrote: >>Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >> >>>Tarc writes: >>> >>> >>>>On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 08:17:10PM +0200, Dag-Erling SmЬrgrav wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Bad hardware - most likely bad RAM, possibly a bad CPU. >>>> >>>>Hmm... I thinked about this, but RAM is ok. >> >>Side note, I could not have a look at your config/dmesg etc. >>tarc.po.cs.msu.su could not be found. >> >> >>>How do you know? Most software memory testers don't load the system >>>enough to trip over marginal RAM; 'make buildworld' does. >> >>Yeah, buildkernel and buildworld are good stress tests. The same as a >>gcc bootstrap is. >> >> >>>>How test processor? >>> >>> >>>'make buildworld' with known-good RAM is a pretty good indicator. >> >>Here my side note 2, it's not on x86, but on ppc. I have a powerbook >>with one GB of ram. Doing buildworld and buildkernel ended up in such >>sig 11 failures at random places. Not reproducable. >> >>I know my hw is ok, I do daily gcc bootstraps and the machine works. But >>under fbsd ppc I got the above sig 11 issues. A short talk with Peter >>Grehan made me try to reduce the physical memory software side with >>hw.physmem=512M. Bingo, that was it. I could do buildkernel and >>buildworld with hw.physmem=512M. No problem. So, our thinking is, that >>there is a trouble with physical mem > 512/640MB on fbsd ppc. > > > It more likely means that there is a problem with the memory chip(s) that > hold the upper 512MB of memory on your system. A gcc bootstrap is probably > not exercising this memory; a FreeBSD buildworld is. Well, I should have mentioned that the gcc bootstrap procedure happened under OS-X. And I have the experience that bootstrapping gcc with java takes an enormous amount of memory. So this is a prove for me that the hw is ok. It could still be that there is a hw problem. I just wanted to mention the fact that there is some other world. But going back, I suppose, if you have x86, the issue could be really related to hw issues. Regards, Andreas