From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 19 21:12:15 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 0F6D216A41C for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:12:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matt@gsicomp.on.ca) Received: from skippyii.compar.com (skippyii.compar.com [216.208.38.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B33C443D48 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:12:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from matt@gsicomp.on.ca) Received: from hermes (CPE00062566c7bb-CM000039c69a66.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [70.28.254.189]) by skippyii.compar.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j5JLNZZ5030376; Sun, 19 Jun 2005 17:23:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from matt@gsicomp.on.ca) Message-ID: <001b01c57513$9e9265b0$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> From: "Matt Emmerton" To: "Andreas Tobler" , =?UTF-8?B?77+9?= 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> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 17:12:31 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Cc: Tarc , 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 21:12:15 -0000 > 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. -- Matt Emmerton