From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:17:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7AC216A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:17:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A428043D3F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:17:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 78442 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2004 08:16:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 7 Mar 2004 08:16:43 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 00:17:50 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:17:55 -0000 At 11:30 PM 3/6/2004 -0800, you wrote: >On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 11:22:57PM -0800, JG wrote: > > > > What is the best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on > > AMD64? > >Why do you want linuxthreads (which are i386-only) over the default >native kernel threads? > >Kris For SMP support - among other performance increases. See http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/FreeBSD.html Also: http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/000697.html http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/000264.html http://jeremy.zawodny.com/blog/archives/000203.html From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:18:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D82B16A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:18:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ABDB43D3F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:18:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 78467 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2004 08:16:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 7 Mar 2004 08:16:58 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001359.02a1c400@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 00:18:05 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG In-Reply-To: <20040307073038.GA8016@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040306232042.02a32330@66.250.109.241> <5.2.0.9.2.20040306232042.02a32330@66.250.109.241> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:18:09 -0000 > >Why do you want linuxthreads (which are i386-only) over the default >native kernel threads? > >Kris Yeah I guess you're right :( I suppose I'll be running this dual opteron mysql server under Linux after all. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:26:17 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4442416A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:26:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaw6.prodigy.net (mtaw6.prodigy.net [64.164.98.56]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A41843D2F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:26:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (0b294a7b22a42a578444f262b27ea3a4@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203]) by mtaw6.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i278PIa3023756; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:25:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4FE7751700; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:26:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:26:16 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: JG Message-ID: <20040307082615.GA8592@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:26:17 -0000 --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:17:50AM -0800, JG wrote: > At 11:30 PM 3/6/2004 -0800, you wrote: > >On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 11:22:57PM -0800, JG wrote: > >> > >> What is the best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support = on > >> AMD64? > > > >Why do you want linuxthreads (which are i386-only) over the default > >native kernel threads? > > > >Kris >=20 >=20 > For SMP support - among other performance increases. This document applies to FreeBSD 4.x and not 5.x, which has SMP-aware kernel threads. > See http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/FreeBSD.html Kris --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAStynWry0BWjoQKURAiXDAKCH3pGr9lUa1AJs56Gi6UnJCTDynACgxGE7 RwXJu8OobvQQ0V2Lw4jBmfE= =PzCb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:40:41 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA5D416A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:40:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89D1243D1D for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:40:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 79044 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2004 08:39:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 7 Mar 2004 08:39:28 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 00:40:35 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG In-Reply-To: <20040307082615.GA8592@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:40:41 -0000 > > > > > For SMP support - among other performance increases. > >This document applies to FreeBSD 4.x and not 5.x, which has >SMP-aware kernel threads. > > > See http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/FreeBSD.html > >Kris Kris, What about the rest of the problems mentioned with Freebsd native threads vs Linuxthreads? I would really like to get MySQL installed on FreeBSD-AMD64 if possible so I can run benchmarks and compare it to a Linux installation... I'm just not sure what the best way to compile it is. How do you compile Mysql on AMD64? From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:46:20 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F4F16A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:46:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaw4.prodigy.net (mtaw4.prodigy.net [64.164.98.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C59943D2D for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:46:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (2390119706669d1b3c1367efc9e5acf2@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203]) by mtaw4.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i278kBw8004954; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:46:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 76ED051700; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:46:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:46:11 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: JG Message-ID: <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AhhlLboLdkugWU4S" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:46:20 -0000 --AhhlLboLdkugWU4S Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:40:35AM -0800, JG wrote: >=20 > > > >> > >> For SMP support - among other performance increases. > > > >This document applies to FreeBSD 4.x and not 5.x, which has > >SMP-aware kernel threads. > > > >> See http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/FreeBSD.html > > > >Kris >=20 >=20 > Kris, >=20 > What about the rest of the problems mentioned with Freebsd native threads= =20 > vs Linuxthreads? To repeat,=20 *** The document applies to FreeBSD 4.x and not 5.x *** Addressing the limitations of the libc_r userland thread system was a major focus of development in the 5.x branch, and this has been largely achieved. > I would really like to get MySQL installed on FreeBSD-AMD64 if possible s= o=20 > I can run > benchmarks and compare it to a Linux installation... >=20 > I'm just not sure what the best way to compile it is. >=20 > How do you compile Mysql on AMD64? cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make Kris --AhhlLboLdkugWU4S Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFASuFSWry0BWjoQKURAvRNAJ4yPYFBMEbWv1ugnt3M2JDfu+vGOQCg+dM2 +vh1B6FbzfdbmeACk64dPTI= =3TTE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --AhhlLboLdkugWU4S-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:49:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B87716A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:49:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaw6.prodigy.net (mtaw6.prodigy.net [64.164.98.56]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D4F43D1F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:49:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (b68b5b9ce2cea91666d5ef534910fa89@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203]) by mtaw6.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i278mfa3017486; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:48:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6B52C51700; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:49:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:49:39 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20040307084939.GA9111@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:49:40 -0000 --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:46:11AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make s/mysql-server41-server/mysql41-server/, but you get the idea. Kris --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFASuIiWry0BWjoQKURAkWSAKC4OocVvXlMyy7gyrnyHmkzacmY2wCguL1S 2BqCOrRV5wxB/ks+PgJ6Mp4= =Ewln -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1yeeQ81UyVL57Vl7-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 00:54:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABFD316A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:54:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 788C643D1D for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:54:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 79449 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2004 08:53:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 7 Mar 2004 08:53:37 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307005354.02aa85d8@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 00:54:43 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG In-Reply-To: <20040307084939.GA9111@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:54:48 -0000 At 12:49 AM 3/7/2004 -0800, you wrote: >On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:46:11AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make > >s/mysql-server41-server/mysql41-server/, but you get the idea. > >Kris That port is not for AMD64 apparently: amd64f# pwd ; make /usr/ports/databases/mysql41-server ===> mysql-server-4.1.0_1 is only for i386 alpha sparc64, and you are running amd64. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 01:26:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F71716A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:26:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0369443D31 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:26:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (b127168fc52016f47c0a5e0c7075b9fb@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203])i279QrrA009653; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 03:26:54 -0600 (CST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C298651700; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:26:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:26:52 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: JG Message-ID: <20040307092652.GA9514@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307005354.02aa85d8@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307005354.02aa85d8@mail.ojoink.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 09:26:55 -0000 --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:54:43AM -0800, JG wrote: > At 12:49 AM 3/7/2004 -0800, you wrote: > >On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:46:11AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > >> cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make > > > >s/mysql-server41-server/mysql41-server/, but you get the idea. > > > >Kris >=20 >=20 > That port is not for AMD64 apparently: >=20 >=20 > amd64f# pwd ; make > /usr/ports/databases/mysql41-server > =3D=3D=3D> mysql-server-4.1.0_1 is only for i386 alpha sparc64, and you = are=20 > running amd64. Update your ports collection, it is out of date. Kris --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFASurcWry0BWjoQKURAjjlAJ912DEN0APTMnO80pvJTJ6VeXVX+gCfVVgx /SpWStIWwnsrp9qyNv9KTQc= =kWhj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 02:02:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4B0516A4CE; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 02:02:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta4.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5D243D1F; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 02:02:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (cf431dc3e16a4db7d377a24330fb20c1@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203])i27A2NrA010998; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 04:02:24 -0600 (CST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3156F51700; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 02:02:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 02:02:23 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: amd64@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20040307100222.GA12728@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: alc@FreeBSD.org Subject: "Fatal trap 9: general protection fault while in kernel mode" in vm_page_splay() X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 10:02:24 -0000 --x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline hammer01 (amd64 package machine) died with the following just now; it was running a kernel from Feb 26: Fatal trap 9: general protection fault while in kernel mode instruction pointer = 0x8:0xffffffff80486ab0 stack pointer = 0x10:0xffffffff9952d8f0 frame pointer = 0x10:0xffffffff9952d980 code segment = base 0x0, limit 0xfffff, type 0x1b = DPL 0, pres 1, long 1, def32 0, gran 1 processor eflags = interrupt enabled, resume, IOPL = 0 current process = 19276 (cc1plus) kernel: type 9 trap, code=0 Stopped at vm_page_splay+0x20: decl %eax db> trace vm_page_splay() at vm_page_splay+0x20 vm_page_remove() at vm_page_remove+0x93 vm_page_free_toq() at vm_page_free_toq+0xa4 vm_page_free() at vm_page_free+0x1e vm_object_page_remove() at vm_object_page_remove+0x157 vm_map_entry_delete() at vm_map_entry_delete+0xdb vm_map_delete() at vm_map_delete+0x1fb vm_map_remove() at vm_map_remove+0x52 exit1() at exit1+0x590 sys_exit() at sys_exit+0x37 syscall() at syscall+0x314 Xfast_syscall() at Xfast_syscall+0xa8 --- syscall (1, FreeBSD ELF64, sys_exit), rip = 0x6b2840, rsp = 0x7fffffffdaf8, rbp = 0x7fffffffdd10 --- db> --x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFASvMuWry0BWjoQKURAqZ2AKCydFD52+QVcCHMC8HFqdU4Hh8IywCg38jY lx/SfGJEtknIPqC0QewDd2Y= =HI1b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 02:07:57 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A87716A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 02:07:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355BD43D1D for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 02:07:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 81440 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2004 10:06:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 7 Mar 2004 10:06:44 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307020550.02981008@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 02:07:48 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG In-Reply-To: <20040307092652.GA9514@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307005354.02aa85d8@mail.ojoink.com> <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001741.02a227c8@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307003835.02a1bef8@mail.ojoink.com> <20040307084611.GA8987@xor.obsecurity.org> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307005354.02aa85d8@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 10:07:57 -0000 > > >Update your ports collection, it is out of date. > >Kris I had to get the cvsup package from: fetch http://people.freebsd.org/~peter/cvsup-without-gui-16.1h.tbz pkg_add cvsup-without-gui-16.1h.tbz Kris or anyone else out there - Could you post your supfile? Thanks Maybe I'll get to try mysql on FreeBSD-AMD64 after all :) From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 03:15:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C30EF16A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 03:15:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from wn1.sci.kun.nl (wn1.sci.kun.nl [131.174.8.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B449E43D39 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 03:15:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adridg@sci.kun.nl) Received: from wn4.sci.kun.nl [131.174.8.3] (helo=wn4.sci.kun.nl) by wn1.sci.kun.nl (8.12.10/3.66) with ESMTP id i27BFJrL017899; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:15:19 +0100 (MET) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:15:19 +0100 (MET) From: Adriaan de Groot To: JG In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040306213104.026c1048@66.250.109.241> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvsup (port) for FreeBSD-AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: adridg@cs.kun.nl List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 11:15:22 -0000 On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, JG wrote: > ===> cvsup-16.1h is only for alpha i386 sparc64, and you are running amd64. > > Is it possible to build cvsup on AMD64? Yes, if you port the modula-3 compiler first. Check the archives of this list for details - there _is_ a binary package of cvsup that works (with no gui, and no compression). From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 04:01:25 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2B0916A4CF for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 04:01:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from wn1.sci.kun.nl (wn1.sci.kun.nl [131.174.8.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A7543D1F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 04:01:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adridg@sci.kun.nl) Received: from wn4.sci.kun.nl [131.174.8.3] (helo=wn4.sci.kun.nl) by wn1.sci.kun.nl (8.12.10/3.66) with ESMTP id i27C1OrL026450; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 13:01:24 +0100 (MET) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 13:01:24 +0100 (MET) From: Adriaan de Groot To: JG In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307020550.02981008@mail.ojoink.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: adridg@cs.kun.nl List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 12:01:25 -0000 On Sun, 7 Mar 2004, JG wrote: > Could you post your supfile? You can use the example supfile from /usr/shares/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile as usual, changing the host line to a cvsup server near you (I dunno, try cvsup12), and, and this is ESSENTIAL, commenting out the "*default compress" line, for otherwise it will just Not Work At All. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 04:44:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC7B216A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 04:44:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from omega.metrics.com (internal.metrics.com [204.138.110.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7125B43D46 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 04:44:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tomh@waterloo.equitrac.com) Received: from syncro.metrics.com ([192.168.96.20]) by omega.metrics.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i27CjSPv061244 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:45:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from tomh@waterloo.equitrac.com) Received: by SYNCRO with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:43:26 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Haapanen, Tom" To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 07:43:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version 0.67, clamav-milter version 0.66n X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Scanned-By: milter-spamc/0.14.238 (omega [192.168.96.200]); pass=YES; Sun, 07 Mar 2004 07:45:28 -0500 X-Spam-Status: NO, hits=0.00 required=5.00 X-Spam-Level: Subject: RE: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 12:44:49 -0000 >> I'm just not sure what the best way to compile it is. >> How do you compile Mysql on AMD64? Kris Kennaway: > cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make As I recall, I just downloaded the current MySQL 4.1 sources from mysql.com and built them. Running rock-solid for over a month in production use now: dual Opteron 242 on a Tyan K8S Pro. Tom From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 09:23:59 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E8B16A4D3; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:23:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from MTVMIME03.enterprise.veritas.com (bay-bridge.veritas.com [143.127.3.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA9643D3F; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:23:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bkorb@veritas.com) Received: from megami.veritas.com (unverified) by MTVMIME03.enterprise.veritas.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.12) with SMTP id ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:08:56 -0800 Received: from bach.veritas.com ([172.22.12.213]) (2507 bytes) by megami.veritas.com via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:smart_host/T:smtp (sender: ) id for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:08:55 -0800 (PST) (Smail-3.2.0.101 1997-Dec-17 #15 built 2001-Aug-30) Received: from veritas.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by bach.veritas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE1D75810D; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:12:55 -0500 (EST) Sender: bkorb@veritas.com Message-ID: <404B580C.F23EFE1F@veritas.com> Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 09:12:44 -0800 From: Bruce Korb Organization: Home X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18-3 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <20040307022924.GA95884@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: amd64@freebsd.org cc: kris@freebsd.org cc: Bruce Korb Subject: Re: devel/autogen BROKEN on amd64: Build fails X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:23:59 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > Hmm, it's building on another retry, but the logs show it's failed > half a dozen times with the same error over the past few months. It > looks like some kind of race condition in the code :-( Possible, if the doc build and library builds go on in parallel. For the interested, here is what is going on at the failure: The autogen.texi file is being rebuilt. Among the various things being put into the doc is an example of a purely generated program that builds a command line option parser for a shell script. In order to function, it must generate, compile, link and execute this program. The instructions to do that are in shell script embedded in the documentation template, "doc/auto_gen.tpl". If this can be repeated again, I would try to diagnose the problem by saving (instead of discarding) all the output from the compile: @example [= ` opts="-o genshellopt -DTEST_GETDEFS_OPTS -g -I${OPTDIR}" ( cat ${top_srcdir}/getdefs/opts.def echo "test_main = 'putShellParse';" ) | ( cd ${tempdir} HOME='' ${AGEXE} -t40 -L${OPTDIR} -bgenshellopt -- - ${CC} ${opts} genshellopt.c ${libs} ) > /dev/null 2>&1 if [ ! -x ${tempdir}/genshellopt ] then echo "NO GENSHELLOPT PROGRAM" >&2 kill -TERM $AG_pid exit 1 fi ${tempdir}/genshellopt --help | \ sed 's,\t, ,g;s,\\([@{}]\\),@\\1,g' echo echo ${tempdir}/genshellopt -o ${tempdir}/genshellopt.sh || kill -HUP $AG_pid sed 's,\t, ,g;s,\\([@{}]\\),@\\1,g' ${tempdir}/genshellopt.sh ` =] @end example From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 09:59:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFEB816A4CE; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:59:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ares.wolfpond.org (ns1.wolfpond.org [62.212.96.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CC8743D48; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 09:59:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ftigeot@wolfpond.org) Received: from ares.wolfpond.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ares.wolfpond.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i27HwsxC059278; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 18:58:54 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from greywolf@ares.wolfpond.org) Received: (from greywolf@localhost) by ares.wolfpond.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i27Hwr6O059277; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 18:58:53 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from greywolf) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 18:58:53 +0100 From: Francois Tigeot To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040307175852.GD40161@ares.wolfpond.org> References: <20040304175103.GA36195@ares.wolfpond.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040304175103.GA36195@ares.wolfpond.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Cross-compilation to i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:59:09 -0000 [copy to -current since it may be of help to other freebsd ports] On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 06:51:03PM +0100, Francois Tigeot wrote: > > I'm currently running a 5.2.1-RELEASE/amd64 system and I'm trying to > cross-build an i386 world with the following command : > > time nice make buildworld TARGET_ARCH=i386 DESTDIR=/itx > > This fails miserably with these error messages : > > cc -Os -march=c3 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -I/usr/src/sbin/gbde/../../sys -DRESCUE -Wsystem -headers -Werror -Wall -Wno-format-y2k -W -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer -arith -Wreturn-type -Wcast-qual -Wwrite-strings -Wswitch -Wshadow -Wcast-align -c /usr/src/sys/crypto/sha2/sha2.c > {standard input}: Assembler messages: > {standard input}:92: Error: bignum invalid > {standard input}:93: Error: bignum invalid > [more bignum invalid lines] I've managed to make it work. The 'bignum invalid' error is caused by this type of gcc-generated assembly code : .quad 8158064640168781261 .quad -5349999486874862801 For some reason, as doesn't like big negative numbers. This is what I did : - I installed a stock copy of binutils compiled with --target=i386-freebsd and --enable-64-bit-bfd - I initiated a buildworld to populate /usr/obj - After the first build failure, I replaced /usr/obj/i386/usr/src/amd64/usr/bin/as with the new assembler, protecting it by a chflags command The world and kernel builds then completed succesfully. The new i386 kernel boots on a diskless machine. Now, I understand a new binutils import was scheduled before 5.3-RELEASE. Is there any reason not to compile it with the '--enable-64-bit-bfd' option on 64-bit architectures ? -- Francois Tigeot From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 12:20:23 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7DA16A4DB for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:20:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (Odin.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.32.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A2043D54 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:20:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (IDENT:brdavis@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i27KK6RH015500; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:20:06 -0800 Received: (from brdavis@localhost) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3/Submit) id i27KK1b7015493; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:20:01 -0800 Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:20:01 -0800 From: Brooks Davis To: JG Message-ID: <20040307201957.GC12163@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040306232042.02a32330@66.250.109.241> <5.2.0.9.2.20040306232042.02a32330@66.250.109.241> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001359.02a1c400@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307001359.02a1c400@mail.ojoink.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) on odin.ac.hmc.edu cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 20:20:23 -0000 --/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:18:05AM -0800, JG wrote: >=20 > > > >Why do you want linuxthreads (which are i386-only) over the default > >native kernel threads? > > > >Kris >=20 >=20 > Yeah I guess you're right :( >=20 > I suppose I'll be running this dual opteron mysql server under Linux afte= r=20 > all. We've got two native kernel thread implemenations that work for amd64, libpthread and libthr. Why not use one of them? -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAS4POXY6L6fI4GtQRAjyjAJ9YseAGkWp9LsMrX6ezC2ABZR+n5wCg1CbB LiPIKq90B8UlG2VkQSs2rhY= =TBD+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --/Uq4LBwYP4y1W6pO-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 15:54:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA4E16A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 15:54:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk (yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.67]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DC8743D1F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 15:54:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from br260@cam.ac.uk) Received: from br260.wolfson.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.242.109] helo=[192.168.0.2]) by yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B086J-0003BE-00; Sun, 07 Mar 2004 23:54:32 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040306213104.026c1048@66.250.109.241> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040306213104.026c1048@66.250.109.241> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bin Ren Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 23:54:25 +0000 To: JG X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvsup (port) for FreeBSD-AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 23:54:36 -0000 pkg_add this one: http://people.freebsd.org/~peter/cvsup-without-gui-16.1h.tbz -- Bin On 7 Mar 2004, at 05:32, JG wrote: > > Trying to compile it from ports gives an error... > > ===> cvsup-16.1h is only for alpha i386 sparc64, and you are running > amd64. > > Is it possible to build cvsup on AMD64? > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 16:32:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF7A116A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:32:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADE7443D39 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:32:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 871 invoked by uid 89); 8 Mar 2004 00:31:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 8 Mar 2004 00:31:01 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 16:32:03 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: RE: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 00:32:08 -0000 At 07:43 AM 3/7/2004 -0500, you wrote: > >> I'm just not sure what the best way to compile it is. > >> How do you compile Mysql on AMD64? > >Kris Kennaway: > > cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make > >As I recall, I just downloaded the current MySQL 4.1 sources from mysql.com >and built them. > >Running rock-solid for over a month in production use now: dual Opteron 242 >on a Tyan K8S Pro. I may have to try that next, as the port is still semi-broken: After installing mysql41-server from ports with SKIP_DNS_CHECK=yes and it won't start up... My mysql log output: 040307 15:22:33 mysqld started 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Database was not shut down normally! InnoDB: Starting crash recovery. InnoDB: Reading tablespace information from the .ibd files... InnoDB: Restoring possible half-written data pages from the doublewrite InnoDB: buffer... 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Starting log scan based on checkpoint at InnoDB: log sequence number 0 43634. InnoDB: Doing recovery: scanned up to log sequence number 0 43634 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Flushing modified pages from the buffer pool... 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 43634 040307 15:22:34 Fatal error: Can't open privilege tables: Table 'mysql.host' doesn't exist 040307 15:22:34 mysqld ended I've looked on google a bit for this & it sounds like the system tables aren't being fully created or something. What a mess this is so far... but I'm very curious how this AMD64 Mysql box on FreeBSDwill stack up against Linux - so I will continue on till I get it all working - and then report the various benchmarks. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 16:46:42 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E98D416A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:46:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaw4.prodigy.net (mtaw4.prodigy.net [64.164.98.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D006C43D45 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:46:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (a5557359d4eb7842da880beebf022127@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203]) by mtaw4.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i280kbw8006755; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:46:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 69F96521DA; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:46:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 16:46:36 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: JG Message-ID: <20040308004636.GA49947@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 00:46:43 -0000 --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 04:32:03PM -0800, JG wrote: > I may have to try that next, as the port is still semi-broken: >=20 >=20 > After installing mysql41-server from ports with SKIP_DNS_CHECK=3Dyes and = it=20 > won't start up... >=20 > My mysql log output: >=20 > 040307 15:22:33 mysqld started > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Database was not shut down normally! > InnoDB: Starting crash recovery. > InnoDB: Reading tablespace information from the .ibd files... > InnoDB: Restoring possible half-written data pages from the doublewrite > InnoDB: buffer... > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Starting log scan based on checkpoint at > InnoDB: log sequence number 0 43634. > InnoDB: Doing recovery: scanned up to log sequence number 0 43634 > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Flushing modified pages from the buffer pool... > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 43634 > 040307 15:22:34 Fatal error: Can't open privilege tables: Table=20 > 'mysql.host' doesn't exist > 040307 15:22:34 mysqld ended >=20 > I've looked on google a bit for this & it sounds like the system tables= =20 > aren't being fully created or something. Sounds like this is just a configuration problem...try asking on a mysql support list. Kris --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAS8JrWry0BWjoQKURAsgZAKCLFXa14a/izO10jzumqyJkAh7q5ACg2LaQ OM0nxciTziTu2INFIkz2EgE= =UgM9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 17:01:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADDDA16A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 17:01:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from xyzzy.wireless.snsonline.net (office-fw.iexec.net.au [210.18.210.230]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80D643D3F for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 17:01:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msergeant@snsonline.net) Received: from xyzzy.wireless.snsonline.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i2812ABR009100; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:02:10 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from msergeant@snsonline.net) Received: (from msergeant@localhost)i28128h7009099; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:02:08 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from msergeant@snsonline.net) X-Authentication-Warning: xyzzy.wireless.snsonline.net: msergeant set sender to msergeant@snsonline.net using -f From: Mark Sergeant To: JG In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-BR5J2sFLUQDJz8KTJI1p" Organization: SNSOnline Technical Services Message-Id: <1078707727.1307.1.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 11:02:07 +1000 cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 01:01:55 -0000 --=-BR5J2sFLUQDJz8KTJI1p Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 10:32, JG wrote: > At 07:43 AM 3/7/2004 -0500, you wrote: > > >> I'm just not sure what the best way to compile it is. > > >> How do you compile Mysql on AMD64? > > > >Kris Kennaway: > > > cd /usr/ports/databases/mysql-server41-server; make > > > >As I recall, I just downloaded the current MySQL 4.1 sources from mysql.= com > >and built them. > > > >Running rock-solid for over a month in production use now: dual Opteron = 242 > >on a Tyan K8S Pro. >=20 > I may have to try that next, as the port is still semi-broken: >=20 >=20 > After installing mysql41-server from ports with SKIP_DNS_CHECK=3Dyes and = it=20 > won't start up... >=20 > My mysql log output: >=20 > 040307 15:22:33 mysqld started > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Database was not shut down normally! > InnoDB: Starting crash recovery. > InnoDB: Reading tablespace information from the .ibd files... > InnoDB: Restoring possible half-written data pages from the doublewrite > InnoDB: buffer... > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Starting log scan based on checkpoint at > InnoDB: log sequence number 0 43634. > InnoDB: Doing recovery: scanned up to log sequence number 0 43634 > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Flushing modified pages from the buffer pool... > 040307 15:22:34 InnoDB: Started; log sequence number 0 43634 > 040307 15:22:34 Fatal error: Can't open privilege tables: Table=20 > 'mysql.host' doesn't exist > 040307 15:22:34 mysqld ended >=20 > I've looked on google a bit for this & it sounds like the system tables=20 > aren't being fully created or something. >=20 >=20 There is a known bug with mysql4.x, amd64 and innodb. If you can avoid using innodb then you shouldn't have any problems. > What a mess this is so far... but I'm very curious how this AMD64 Mysql=20 > box on FreeBSDwill stack up against > Linux - so I will continue on till I get it all working - and then report= =20 > the various benchmarks. >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" --=20 Mark Sergeant SNSOnline Technical Services --=-BR5J2sFLUQDJz8KTJI1p Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBAS8YPbS4ZEpHb8t0RArhlAJ9M6Ov2Zm4+8TOUqpQFofaaftIVRACaAtTw U7eH97o+r7K47/6mygjW+aA= =2Ble -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-BR5J2sFLUQDJz8KTJI1p-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 17:08:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25CB016A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 17:08:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from ojoink.com (unknown [216.65.123.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0581B43D41 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 17:08:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from amd64list@jpgsworld.com) Received: (qmail 1985 invoked by uid 89); 8 Mar 2004 01:07:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO MAINBX.jpgsworld.com) (amd64list@jpgsworld.com@67.172.167.223) by host180.ojoink.com with SMTP; 8 Mar 2004 01:07:26 -0000 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307170413.04152e48@mail.ojoink.com> X-Sender: amd64list@jpgsworld.com@mail.ojoink.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:08:27 -0800 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org From: JG In-Reply-To: <1078707727.1307.1.camel@localhost> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040307162901.04125088@mail.ojoink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: RE: Best way to compile Mysql 4.1.x with Linuxthreads support on AMD64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 01:08:33 -0000 > > >There is a known bug with mysql4.x, amd64 and innodb. If you can avoid >using innodb then you shouldn't have any problems. Does the bug apply for AMD64 on Linux as well? I wanted to use InnoDB for some of the write-heavy tables How do you compile (the port) without InnoDB? .. there are no references to innodb or myisam in the makefile. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 7 19:49:37 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E71116A4CE for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:49:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3223743D39 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 19:49:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rodrigc@h00609772adf0.ne.client2.attbi.com) Received: from dibbler.crodrigues.org (h00609772adf0.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.31.45.197]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2004030803493601100g8sqee>; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 03:49:36 +0000 Received: from dibbler.crodrigues.org (localhost.crodrigues.org [127.0.0.1]) i283nktI023635 for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:49:46 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rodrigc@h00609772adf0.ne.client2.attbi.com) Received: (from rodrigc@localhost) by dibbler.crodrigues.org (8.12.11/8.12.10/Submit) id i283nj8r023634 for freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:49:45 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rodrigc) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 22:49:45 -0500 From: Craig Rodrigues To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040308034945.GA23612@crodrigues.org> References: <20040305234734.GA11885@crodrigues.org> <200403060956.38738.peter@wemm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200403060956.38738.peter@wemm.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: machdep.hlt_cpus undocumented sysctl X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 03:49:37 -0000 On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 09:56:38AM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > Its a user settable bitmap of cpus that you want to stop running > processes and halt. For example, if you set it to 14, thats binary > 00001110.. that will halt cpu 1,2,3 but leave cpu 0 running. Wow, that info is very useful, and I would not have figured that out on my own. Would this be an acceptable way to document the sysctl? --- sys/amd64/amd64/mp_machdep.c.orig Sun Mar 7 22:40:41 2004 +++ sys/amd64/amd64/mp_machdep.c Sun Mar 7 22:46:50 2004 @@ -1015,7 +1015,7 @@ return (error); } SYSCTL_PROC(_machdep, OID_AUTO, hlt_cpus, CTLTYPE_INT|CTLFLAG_RW, - 0, 0, sysctl_hlt_cpus, "IU", ""); + 0, 0, sysctl_hlt_cpus, "IU", "Bitmap of CPUs to halt. 101 (binary) will halt CPUs 0 and 2."); static int sysctl_hlt_logical_cpus(SYSCTL_HANDLER_ARGS) -- Craig Rodrigues http://crodrigues.org rodrigc@crodrigues.org From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 8 01:11:46 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9426E16A4CE; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 01:11:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from tigra.ip.net.ua (tigra.ip.net.ua [82.193.96.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F40D543D31; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 01:11:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ru@ip.net.ua) Received: from heffalump.office.ipnet (heffalump.ip.net.ua [82.193.96.213]) by tigra.ip.net.ua (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i289F41t023932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:15:05 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from ru@ip.net.ua) Received: (from ru@localhost) by heffalump.office.ipnet (8.12.11/8.12.11) id i289BbEL028249; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:11:37 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from ru) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:11:37 +0200 From: Ruslan Ermilov To: Francois Tigeot Message-ID: <20040308091137.GC28067@ip.net.ua> References: <20040304175103.GA36195@ares.wolfpond.org> <20040307175852.GD40161@ares.wolfpond.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IDYEmSnFhs3mNXr+" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040307175852.GD40161@ares.wolfpond.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: Alexander Kabaev cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org cc: David O'Brien Subject: Re: Cross-compilation to i386 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 09:11:46 -0000 --IDYEmSnFhs3mNXr+ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu" Content-Disposition: inline --JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:58:53PM +0100, Francois Tigeot wrote: > [copy to -current since it may be of help to other freebsd ports] >=20 > On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 06:51:03PM +0100, Francois Tigeot wrote: > >=20 > > I'm currently running a 5.2.1-RELEASE/amd64 system and I'm trying to > > cross-build an i386 world with the following command : > >=20 > > time nice make buildworld TARGET_ARCH=3Di386 DESTDIR=3D/itx > >=20 > > This fails miserably with these error messages : > >=20 > > cc -Os -march=3Dc3 -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -I/usr/src/sbin/gbde/../.= =2E/sys -DRESCUE -Wsystem -headers -Werror -Wall -Wno-format-y2k -W -Wstric= t-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer -arith -Wreturn-type -Wcast-qua= l -Wwrite-strings -Wswitch -Wshadow -Wcast-align -c /usr/src/sys/crypto/sh= a2/sha2.c > > {standard input}: Assembler messages: > > {standard input}:92: Error: bignum invalid > > {standard input}:93: Error: bignum invalid > > [more bignum invalid lines] >=20 > I've managed to make it work. >=20 > The 'bignum invalid' error is caused by this type of gcc-generated > assembly code : >=20 > .quad 8158064640168781261 > .quad -5349999486874862801 >=20 > For some reason, as doesn't like big negative numbers. >=20 I use the attached patch to cross-compile world for 64-bit machines. > This is what I did : >=20 > - I installed a stock copy of binutils compiled with > --target=3Di386-freebsd and --enable-64-bit-bfd >=20 > - I initiated a buildworld to populate /usr/obj >=20 > - After the first build failure, I replaced /usr/obj/i386/usr/src/amd64/= usr/bin/as > with the new assembler, protecting it by a chflags command >=20 > The world and kernel builds then completed succesfully. The new i386 kern= el > boots on a diskless machine. >=20 > Now, I understand a new binutils import was scheduled before 5.3-RELEASE. > Is there any reason not to compile it with the '--enable-64-bit-bfd' > option on 64-bit architectures ? >=20 Nice to hear there are other options that do not require patching. David, any chance you can investigate the effect of enabling the --enable-64-bit-bfd knob? Cheers, --=20 Ruslan Ermilov FreeBSD committer ru@FreeBSD.org --JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gas.diff" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Index: expr.c =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/contrib/binutils/gas/expr.c,v retrieving revision 1.1.1.7 diff -u -r1.1.1.7 expr.c --- expr.c 11 Oct 2002 06:00:09 -0000 1.1.1.7 +++ expr.c 2 Feb 2003 03:06:50 -0000 @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ #ifdef BFD64 static valueT generic_bignum_to_int64 PARAMS ((void)); #endif +static void bignum_negate PARAMS ((expressionS *)); static void integer_constant PARAMS ((int radix, expressionS * expressionP= )); static void mri_char_constant PARAMS ((expressionS *)); static void current_location PARAMS ((expressionS *)); @@ -756,6 +757,40 @@ } } =20 +/* In: An expressionP for a bignum to negate. + + Out: A negated expressionP. + && exp->X_add_number =3D=3D 0 + && symbol_get_value_expression (exp->X_add_symbol)->X_op =3D=3D O_big +*/ + +static void +bignum_negate (exp) + expressionS *exp; +{ + int i; + unsigned long carry; + + /* Negate the bignum: one's complement each digit and add 1. */ + carry =3D 1; + for (i =3D 0; i < exp->X_add_number; i++) + { + unsigned long next; + + next =3D (((~(generic_bignum[i] & LITTLENUM_MASK)) + & LITTLENUM_MASK) + + carry); + generic_bignum[i] =3D next & LITTLENUM_MASK; + carry =3D next >> LITTLENUM_NUMBER_OF_BITS; + } + + if (carry > 0) + { + generic_bignum[exp->X_add_number] =3D carry; + exp->X_add_number ++; + } +} + /* In: Input_line_pointer points to 1st char of operand, which may be a space. =20 @@ -1082,14 +1117,24 @@ else if (expressionP->X_op !=3D O_illegal && expressionP->X_op !=3D O_absent) { - expressionP->X_add_symbol =3D make_expr_symbol (expressionP); if (c =3D=3D '-') - expressionP->X_op =3D O_uminus; + { + if (expressionP->X_op =3D=3D O_big + && expressionP->X_add_number > 0) + bignum_negate(expressionP); + else + expressionP->X_op =3D O_uminus; + } else if (c =3D=3D '~' || c =3D=3D '"') expressionP->X_op =3D O_bit_not; else expressionP->X_op =3D O_logical_not; - expressionP->X_add_number =3D 0; + + if (expressionP->X_op !=3D O_big) + { + expressionP->X_add_number =3D 0; + expressionP->X_add_symbol =3D make_expr_symbol (expressionP); + } } else as_warn (_("Unary operator %c ignored because bad operand follows"), --JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu-- --IDYEmSnFhs3mNXr+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFATDjJUkv4P6juNwoRAts4AKCIiGbzI1Vu7WFJjmPVj2ujE4NvxACfRALH laKiWJr4hbpPn3+2Uiszskc= =zeuK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IDYEmSnFhs3mNXr+-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 8 11:01:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A7D716A4CE for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:01:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8496843D1D for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:01:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i28J1bbv072677 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:01:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: (from peter@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i28J1bMs072671 for freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:01:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 11:01:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200403081901.i28J1bMs072671@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: peter set sender to owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Current problem reports assigned to you X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 19:01:38 -0000 Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o [2003/11/26] amd64/59713 amd64 Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C5ED16A4CE for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 22:04:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from bsdhosting.net (bsdhosting.net [65.39.221.113]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DC82443D2F for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 22:04:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jhopper@bsdhosting.net) Received: (qmail 74421 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2004 06:04:29 -0000 Received: from bsdhosting.net (HELO corp.digitaloasys.net) (jhopper@bsdhosting.net@65.39.221.113) by bsdhosting.net with SMTP; 11 Mar 2004 06:04:29 -0000 From: Justin Hopper To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1078985074.3422.157.camel@work.gusalmighty.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 22:04:34 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: hardware suggestions X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 06:04:36 -0000 Hello, I'm investigating the use of a dual or quad Opteron server for an upcoming project and am curious what vendors people are using for their hardware. We will need a 1U with 3 or 4 hot-swap SCSI drive bays, and we will of course be running FreeBSD. I've been on Appro's site, but it seems that they are missing the server that I'm looking for. Their 1U boxen have only 2 drive bays. I'm also looking to get an overall feel for the stability and maturity of the freebsd-amd64 branch. I just joined the list, so I'm sorry if this has been discussed before. I'll gladly accept pasted messages from times past. Thanks for any assistance. -- Justin Hopper UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 01:23:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D65E16A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 01:23:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.uk.psi.com (mail.uk.psi.com [154.8.2.142]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FB1443D1D for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 01:23:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from alan.barrow@psineteurope.com) Received: from camdev-01.ops.uk.psi.com ([154.8.22.17]) by mail.uk.psi.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1B1MPn-0004U6-00; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:23:43 +0000 From: alan barrow To: Justin Hopper In-Reply-To: <1078985074.3422.157.camel@work.gusalmighty.com> References: <1078985074.3422.157.camel@work.gusalmighty.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 (1.0.8-9.7x.1) Date: 11 Mar 2004 09:23:28 +0000 Message-Id: <1078997023.22141.27.camel@ip5.ops.uk.psi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 cc: "freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: hardware suggestions X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:23:50 -0000 Dude :) may the force be with you... I have been trying the tyan 2882 with onboard SCSI. Just make sure you have the correct riser and free-64 goes in fine. We have also tried the board with the SMDC card - console redirect to COMM2. The board looks good so far the broadcom adapters work fine, as for SCSI we are using the LSI 301 and have tried the intel SRCU42L both seem to work fine. N.B. The only issue with the LSI is you need patience as the BIOS only comes up after all the boot devices have failed. We sourced via UK, but the SUN kit comes direct from these guy's and works really well (good fit and LOM) http://www.newisys.com/products/2100_specifications.html yours a.r.b. On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 06:04, Justin Hopper wrote: > Hello, > > I'm investigating the use of a dual or quad Opteron server for an > upcoming project and am curious what vendors people are using for their > hardware. We will need a 1U with 3 or 4 hot-swap SCSI drive bays, and > we will of course be running FreeBSD. > > I've been on Appro's site, but it seems that they are missing the server > that I'm looking for. Their 1U boxen have only 2 drive bays. > > I'm also looking to get an overall feel for the stability and maturity > of the freebsd-amd64 branch. I just joined the list, so I'm sorry if > this has been discussed before. I'll gladly accept pasted messages from > times past. > > Thanks for any assistance. > -- > Justin Hopper > UNIX Systems Engineer > BSDHosting.net > Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. > http://www.bsdhosting.net > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 08:03:10 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E7116A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:03:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from bsdhosting.net (bsdhosting.net [65.39.221.113]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7651E43D49 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:03:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jhopper@bsdhosting.net) Received: (qmail 92670 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2004 16:03:02 -0000 Received: from bsdhosting.net (HELO corp.digitaloasys.net) (jhopper@bsdhosting.net@65.39.221.113) by bsdhosting.net with SMTP; 11 Mar 2004 16:03:02 -0000 From: Justin Hopper To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <1078997023.22141.27.camel@ip5.ops.uk.psi.com> References: <1078985074.3422.157.camel@work.gusalmighty.com> <1078997023.22141.27.camel@ip5.ops.uk.psi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1079020986.3422.164.camel@work.gusalmighty.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 08:03:07 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: hardware suggestions X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 16:03:10 -0000 On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 01:23, alan barrow wrote: > Dude :) may the force be with you... Does this mean that you've checked for 1U 4-hot-swap drive systems, and you didn't find them either? So far, my search is turning up nada. > I have been trying the tyan 2882 with onboard SCSI. Just make sure you > have the correct riser and free-64 goes in fine. We have also tried the > board with the SMDC card - console redirect to COMM2. I checked out the Newisys 2100, and it actually looks like a better offering than Appro's. Have you been able to performance test the onboard SCSI controller? I'd be most curious about throughput and CPU utilization under heavy I/O loads, as this project is going to be mainly database-driven and has the potential of creating a massive I/O load. Also, do you happen to have a ballpark figure for how much the 2100 costs? I hate companies that won't give you a rough price up front, but instead force you to contact their sales team for a quote >:( > The board looks good so far the broadcom adapters work fine, as for SCSI > we are using the LSI 301 and have tried the intel SRCU42L both seem to > work fine. > > N.B. The only issue with the LSI is you need patience as the BIOS only > comes up after all the boot devices have failed. That's no fun =( > We sourced via UK, but the SUN kit comes direct from these guy's and > works really well (good fit and LOM) > > http://www.newisys.com/products/2100_specifications.html > > yours a.r.b. > > On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 06:04, Justin Hopper wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm investigating the use of a dual or quad Opteron server for an > > upcoming project and am curious what vendors people are using for their > > hardware. We will need a 1U with 3 or 4 hot-swap SCSI drive bays, and > > we will of course be running FreeBSD. > > > > I've been on Appro's site, but it seems that they are missing the server > > that I'm looking for. Their 1U boxen have only 2 drive bays. > > > > I'm also looking to get an overall feel for the stability and maturity > > of the freebsd-amd64 branch. I just joined the list, so I'm sorry if > > this has been discussed before. I'll gladly accept pasted messages from > > times past. > > > > Thanks for any assistance. > > -- > > Justin Hopper > > UNIX Systems Engineer > > BSDHosting.net > > Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. > > http://www.bsdhosting.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > -- Justin Hopper UNIX Systems Engineer BSDHosting.net Hosting Division of Digital Oasys Inc. http://www.bsdhosting.net From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 13:56:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 210B416A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:56:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout06.sul.t-online.com (mailout06.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C9F43D45 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:56:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from NaviData@t-online.de) Received: from fwd04.aul.t-online.de by mailout06.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1B1Y9u-0001Nk-03; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:56:06 +0100 Received: from WIXPBOX (TzPI7YZCweJ4Nx+RpvkcUIgbchgTRykeDeCr+Fscz4ZybD9PoDaqrs@[217.82.241.190]) by fwd04.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1B1Y9d-0L34760; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:55:49 +0100 Message-ID: <002501c407b3$a2afd7f0$3200a8c0@WIXPBOX> From: NaviData@t-online.de To: Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:55:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Seen: false X-ID: TzPI7YZCweJ4Nx+RpvkcUIgbchgTRykeDeCr+Fscz4ZybD9PoDaqrs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: AMD 64bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:56:08 -0000 I have a 64bit AMD 3200+ on a AsusK8v with 2x120GB Segate S-ATA drives i = would=B4t like to test 64bit FreeBSD OS=20 greetz Sven Brendlin From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 13:58:51 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B933C16A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:58:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAE5243D39 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:58:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (c794b6b06dcfa2f8c2836b68926345b6@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203])i2BLwoTj006509; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:58:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6261551A33; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:58:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 13:58:50 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: NaviData@t-online.de Message-ID: <20040311215850.GA24646@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <002501c407b3$a2afd7f0$3200a8c0@WIXPBOX> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Kj7319i9nmIyA2yE" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <002501c407b3$a2afd7f0$3200a8c0@WIXPBOX> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: AMD 64bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:58:51 -0000 --Kj7319i9nmIyA2yE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 10:55:57PM +0100, NaviData@t-online.de wrote: > I have a 64bit AMD 3200+ on a AsusK8v with 2x120GB Segate S-ATA drives i = would?t like to test 64bit FreeBSD OS=20 > greetz This mail didn't seem to contain a question :-) Kris --Kj7319i9nmIyA2yE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAUOEZWry0BWjoQKURArLiAKD96uPzYG7SlpXIXwKSUukTp0V28QCfdZx6 1xH+eka/zRwX1gADtSygbDo= =WYad -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Kj7319i9nmIyA2yE-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 14:03:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B2816A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:03:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from sergievsky.cpmc.columbia.edu (sergievsky.cpmc.columbia.edu [156.145.113.18]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D07E743D1D for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:03:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gary@sergievsky.cpmc.columbia.edu) Received: from [156.145.114.51] (HELO sergievsky.cpmc.columbia.edu) by sergievsky.cpmc.columbia.edu (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 3202391; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:04:47 -0500 Message-ID: <4050E24B.6050601@sergievsky.cpmc.columbia.edu> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:03:55 -0500 From: Gary User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5b (Windows/20040204) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: NaviData@t-online.de References: <002501c407b3$a2afd7f0$3200a8c0@WIXPBOX> In-Reply-To: <002501c407b3$a2afd7f0$3200a8c0@WIXPBOX> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: AMD 64bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:03:58 -0000 NaviData@t-online.de wrote: > I have a 64bit AMD 3200+ on a AsusK8v with 2x120GB Segate S-ATA drives i would´t like to test 64bit FreeBSD OS > greetz > Sven Brendlin If the question is, will it work? I have a similar machine with 2 80GB Seagate SATA drives, AMD64 3000+ and ASUS K8V. It's been up and running without a problem for a week. Version 5.2.1 updated to current. Gary Wilson From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 22:21:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B6D16A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:21:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from hotmail.com (law11-oe26.law11.hotmail.com [64.4.16.83]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8B043D46 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:21:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from playthings3265@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:21:56 -0800 Received: from 24.30.35.111 by law11-oe26.law11.hotmail.com with DAV; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 06:21:55 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [24.30.35.111] X-Originating-Email: [playthings3265@hotmail.com] X-Sender: playthings3265@hotmail.com From: "Tye" To: Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 01:21:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Mar 2004 06:21:56.0252 (UTC) FILETIME=[516CCDC0:01C407FA] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: New To unix and linux need to find out whats right for my CPU X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 06:21:56 -0000 Hello my name is Tye and I have been looking at using a anther OS liike = linux but so far not been inpressed with Mandrake, Red Hat, or Gentoo. = I'm looking at using FreeBSD and want to know what type of Distro is = right for my CPU I'm using a AMD K-6 2 with 3-D Tech. Your reply would = help so much thank you for your time Tye From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 22:29:07 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6362416A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:29:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (Odin.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.32.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4517743D39 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:29:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (IDENT:brdavis@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i2C6T3aN016697; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:29:03 -0800 Received: (from brdavis@localhost) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3/Submit) id i2C6T3aT016695; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:29:03 -0800 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:29:03 -0800 From: Brooks Davis To: Tye Message-ID: <20040312062903.GA7661@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) on odin.ac.hmc.edu cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New To unix and linux need to find out whats right for my CPU X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 06:29:07 -0000 --wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 01:21:22AM -0500, Tye wrote: > Hello my name is Tye and I have been looking at using a anther OS > liike linux but so far not been inpressed with Mandrake, Red Hat, or > Gentoo. I'm looking at using FreeBSD and want to know what type of > Distro is right for my CPU I'm using a AMD K-6 2 with 3-D Tech. Your > reply would help so much thank you for your time Tye You would want FreeBSD i386. FreeBSD amd64 is for amd64 CPU's which the K-6 is not. -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUVf+XY6L6fI4GtQRAiNzAKCSbsA6qQG4OOWMBMeqLXuTpNC4dACfb/Wo kdjKtAO5/qfLk6nWZCLlMGs= =0uKY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wRRV7LY7NUeQGEoC-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 11 22:38:29 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30F9516A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:38:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from sarajevo.pacific.net.sg (sarajevo.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.134]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1399F43D48 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:38:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 23088 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 06:38:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO maxwell6.pacific.net.sg) (203.120.90.212) by sarajevo with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 06:38:26 -0000 Received: from pacific.net.sg ([210.24.203.19]) by maxwell6.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id <20040312063825.SXVS9972.maxwell6.pacific.net.sg@pacific.net.sg>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:38:25 +0800 Message-ID: <40515AE1.30701@pacific.net.sg> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:38:25 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky Organization: oceanare pte ltd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us, de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tye References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: New To unix and linux need to find out whats right for my CPU X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 06:38:29 -0000 Hi, Tye wrote: > Hello my name is Tye and I have been looking at using a anther OS liike linux but so far not been inpressed with Mandrake, Red Hat, or Gentoo. I'm looking at using FreeBSD and want to know what type of Distro is right for my CPU I'm using a AMD K-6 2 with 3-D Tech. Your reply would help so much thank you for your time Tye You do not have to worry about distributions here. All you need to know is the architecture you machine is. You will need the i386 which should run just out of the box. You also have to decide on the version you want to use. 4.9 is the stable and 5.2 is the current one. Stable means real stable. I consider current more stable than Linux. But there are always some problems which can hit you like a lightning out of the blue sky. Oh, I just see it. You are subscribed to the wrong list. AMD64 is for Opterons only, not for Athlons and the other x86 CPUs AMD does. Erich From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 04:08:42 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67CC516A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 04:08:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 00A6A43D1D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 04:08:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 72918 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 12:08:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 12:08:01 -0000 Message-ID: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:08:33 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:08:42 -0000 I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published article) I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked it yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I haven't made any factual errors. Please note that the companion articles referenced in this review (the ULE vs 4BSD and the FreeBSD Benchmarking articles) are not yet complete, and their links will go to the 404 page for right now. I hope to have them done soon. I'm subscribed to the list through a redirected email address with no SMTP access, so you don't have to forward responses to me directly. -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 05:01:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F74B16A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:01:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (unknown [195.143.231.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5434243D49 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:01:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (mlifor@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i2CD1ob0076506 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:01:50 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.12.9p2/8.12.9/Submit) id i2CD1oQC076505; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:01:50 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:01:50 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-amd64 User-Agent: tin/1.5.4-20000523 ("1959") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.9-RELEASE (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:01:53 -0000 Jem Matzan wrote: > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an > Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: > > http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php > > (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published > article) > > I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other > eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked it > yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I haven't > made any factual errors. I like the article very much. Well done. I also appre- ciate the fact that you refrained from spoiling the compa- rison with colorful graphics. :-) There are just two things which seem a bit unclear to me. In the very first paragraph it sounds like hyperthreading would always be a performance win, but that's not the case. I've had applications that ran slightly faster when hyper- threading was turned off. If I remember correctly, soft- ware that does many concurrent things and I/O benefits most from hyperthreading, while pure numbercrunching jobs run faster with hyperthreading switched off. (I'm not saying that you should repeat all your benchmarks with hyper- threading off, mind you. I just think that the remark in the first paragraph sounds a little bit misleading. YMMV.) The second point is that the gcc "benchmark" seems a bit unfair for me, because you're really measuring _different_ things when compiling something for i386 and for amd64. The compiler is producing different code, it has to opti- mize differently (particularly because of the different register sets of the processors), so you can't really compare the results. Also take into account that the amd64 code generation engine of gcc is rather new, while the i386 code generation is very mature. Apart from that, I would rather call this "benchmark" synthetic, because nobody buys an Opteron to compile things all day long. Well, except for the FreeBSD package building people, maybe. :-) In relation to that, the oggenc benchmark is certainly much more realistic. It would have been nice to have some video decoding / encoding benchmarks, too (e.g. mplayer / menco- der, transcode, ffmpeg, whatever). Well, just my 2 cents. :-) Regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co KG, Oettingenstr. 2, 80538 München Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things." -- Doug Gwyn From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 05:15:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7096816A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:15:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2645B43D2F for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:15:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 89816 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 13:14:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 13:14:27 -0000 Message-ID: <4051B7D3.8020404@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:14:59 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:15:08 -0000 Oliver Fromme wrote: >Jem Matzan wrote: > > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an > > Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: > > > > http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php > > > > (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published > > article) > > > > I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other > > eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked it > > yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I haven't > > made any factual errors. > >I like the article very much. Well done. I also appre- >ciate the fact that you refrained from spoiling the compa- >rison with colorful graphics. :-) > >There are just two things which seem a bit unclear to me. > >In the very first paragraph it sounds like hyperthreading >would always be a performance win, but that's not the case. >I've had applications that ran slightly faster when hyper- >threading was turned off. If I remember correctly, soft- >ware that does many concurrent things and I/O benefits most >from hyperthreading, while pure numbercrunching jobs run >faster with hyperthreading switched off. (I'm not saying >that you should repeat all your benchmarks with hyper- >threading off, mind you. I just think that the remark in >the first paragraph sounds a little bit misleading. YMMV.) > >The second point is that the gcc "benchmark" seems a bit >unfair for me, because you're really measuring _different_ >things when compiling something for i386 and for amd64. >The compiler is producing different code, it has to opti- >mize differently (particularly because of the different >register sets of the processors), so you can't really >compare the results. Also take into account that the amd64 >code generation engine of gcc is rather new, while the i386 >code generation is very mature. Apart from that, I would >rather call this "benchmark" synthetic, because nobody buys >an Opteron to compile things all day long. Well, except >for the FreeBSD package building people, maybe. :-) > >In relation to that, the oggenc benchmark is certainly much >more realistic. It would have been nice to have some video >decoding / encoding benchmarks, too (e.g. mplayer / menco- >der, transcode, ffmpeg, whatever). > >Well, just my 2 cents. :-) > >Regards > Oliver > > > Hyper-Threading seemed to help with processes that didn't require a heavy CPU load. The OpenSSL tests show it being markedly faster in the smaller algorithms, but lagging way behind the 64-bit Athlon64 when the serious number crunching comes into play. Intel's press kit shows HT (and SSE3) giving an advantage when multitasking with four desktop programs in Windows XP. It's just too hard to show that reliably though. There's a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that AMD64 is faster on the desktop (in X) in 64-bit mode than the Prescott is in 32-bit, but I'm having trouble proving it. As for the buildworld test, I knew that it would be an issue. I did my best to warn readers that it wasn't exactly a good point of comparison because of the variable that GCC presented, but it has its place because a lot of people spend a lot of time compiling (especially in FreeBSD) and they want to know how it performs compared to the others regardless of the reason why. It's not synthetic because it's a real-world scenario, but it's not as good as the oggenc and openssl tests. I hope to have more good tests for round two -- I'll try out the encoders you reccommended. -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 09:47:42 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC6916A4EA for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:47:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (Odin.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.32.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 344BF43D46 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:47:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (IDENT:brdavis@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i2CHlcaN006703; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:47:38 -0800 Received: (from brdavis@localhost) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3/Submit) id i2CHlck6006699; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:47:38 -0800 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:47:38 -0800 From: Brooks Davis To: Jem Matzan Message-ID: <20040312174736.GD7661@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> <4051B7D3.8020404@thejemreport.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9UV9rz0O2dU/yYYn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4051B7D3.8020404@thejemreport.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) on odin.ac.hmc.edu cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:47:42 -0000 --9UV9rz0O2dU/yYYn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: > Hyper-Threading seemed to help with processes that didn't require a=20 > heavy CPU load. The OpenSSL tests show it being markedly faster in the=20 > smaller algorithms, but lagging way behind the 64-bit Athlon64 when the= =20 > serious number crunching comes into play. Intel's press kit shows HT=20 > (and SSE3) giving an advantage when multitasking with four desktop=20 > programs in Windows XP. It's just too hard to show that reliably though.= =20 > There's a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that AMD64 is faster on=20 > the desktop (in X) in 64-bit mode than the Prescott is in 32-bit, but=20 > I'm having trouble proving it. I think it would be a mistake to assume the HT is what accounts for the performance difference. There are so many other architectural differences it's hard to see how you could isolate the effects of HT. My suspicition is that better performance on small=20 algorithms is due to them being more or less memory bound (and thus similar to the pure synthetic benchmarks). -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --9UV9rz0O2dU/yYYn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUfe2XY6L6fI4GtQRAolAAJ9HfsUsXzAZVi9yOZGBc9yXY3/PdwCggCqX kVsG6rFN3rurEQ7uOT8TyVI= =v9hT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9UV9rz0O2dU/yYYn-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 09:50:12 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A052816A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:50:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from curacao.n2it.nl (62-177-157-186.bbeyond.nl [62.177.157.186]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E8A43D2D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:50:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from billsf@curacao.n2it.nl) Received: by curacao.n2it.nl (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8F88C2057; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:50:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:50:10 +0100 From: Bill Squire To: Tye Message-ID: <20040312175010.GA60405@curacao.n2it.nl> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: New To unix and linux need to find out whats right for my CPU X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:50:12 -0000 On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 01:21:22AM -0500, Tye wrote: > Hello my name is Tye and I have been looking at using a anther OS liike linux but so far not been inpressed with Mandrake, Red Hat, or Gentoo. I'm looking at using FreeBSD and want to know what type of Distro is right for my CPU I'm using a AMD K-6 2 with 3-D Tech. Your reply would help so much thank you for your time Tye First learn how to type and how to properly format your letters. You would probably do best with Mandrake or Debian. If you want to play along with BSD, then Gentoo is certainly the one. Eventually, like on the i386, they will be allot of compatibility. Are you sure you are up to obsession this can bring? If you want to program, there is really only one Unix and as a very famous computer journalist said to me as I tried NetBSD for the first time: "They all drive the same." Right he was. Unix is the only way to compute in the 'real world'. If you want to show off, get a Mac: It is FreeBSD with a very likely 64bit future. (OSX-3 is not AFAIK or can tell -- One amd64 beats 4 G5's in the vast majority of benchmarks.) Apple is saying little, but the next Macs are amd64's, but do yourself a favour and build your own box: hardware and software! One word to the wise: "The 64bit future" is quite a number of years back for us real Unix hackers. Let's see, the second generation of Alphas (21164) is eight years old and I have one that has ran 24/7 for almost that long. Bill From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 09:59:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18FE16A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:59:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from curacao.n2it.nl (62-177-157-186.bbeyond.nl [62.177.157.186]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A31843D41 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:59:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from billsf@curacao.n2it.nl) Received: by curacao.n2it.nl (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CC07A2057; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:59:05 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:59:05 +0100 From: Bill Squire To: Jem Matzan Message-ID: <20040312175905.GB60405@curacao.n2it.nl> References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:59:06 -0000 On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 07:08:33AM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an > Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: > > http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php > > (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published > article) > > I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other > eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked it > yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I haven't > made any factual errors. > > Please note that the companion articles referenced in this review (the > ULE vs 4BSD and the FreeBSD Benchmarking articles) are not yet complete, > and their links will go to the 404 page for right now. I hope to have > them done soon. > > I'm subscribed to the list through a redirected email address with no > SMTP access, so you don't have to forward responses to me directly. > > -Jem Real quick. ULE has always been fine on AMD machines since it has been an option in the ordinary 'distros'. There were a few bugs and bumps along the way but with fast processors and U160/320 SCSI I'm never been let down. It works well with SATA and very poor with ordinary IDE and with ATAPI -- FORGET IT! As a 'server person', its the better choice. Bill From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 10:07:39 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B86C816A4D0 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:07:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk (yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.67]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C5943D48 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:07:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from br260@cam.ac.uk) Received: from c79.al.cl.cam.ac.uk ([128.232.110.129]) by yellow.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B1r4K-0004fT-00 for freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:07:36 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <2495DDA6-7450-11D8-B264-000A9576014E@cam.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed To: AMD64 FreeBSD From: Bin Ren Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:07:36 +0000 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) Subject: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:07:39 -0000 Hi, Has anyone successfully installed XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 on 5.2-current? The ports seem to be broken. Besides, my graphics card is ATI Radeon 9600. It seems XFree86 can provide 'vga' driver for it. Thanks, Bin From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 10:25:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F193316A4D0 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from canning.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF53543D41 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@evilpete.dyndns.org) Received: from fw.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by canning.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A91602A928 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@overcee.wemm.org) Received: from overcee.wemm.org (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by fw.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E84D1E259 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@overcee.wemm.org) Received: from overcee.wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2CIPTQK077068; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@overcee.wemm.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by overcee.wemm.org (8.12.11/8.12.10/Submit) id i2CIPSOZ077067; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter) From: Peter Wemm To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:25:28 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> In-Reply-To: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200403121025.28913.peter@wemm.org> cc: Jem Matzan Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:25:33 -0000 On Friday 12 March 2004 04:08 am, Jem Matzan wrote: > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between > an Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: > > http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php > > (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the > published article) > > I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other > eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked > it yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I > haven't made any factual errors. There's a couple of quick comments I'd like to make. The OpenSSL stuff in the FreeBSD source tree has hand-optimized i386 assembler code in it. The amd64 configuration of the integrated OpenSSL uses the generic C code. Given this, I wouldn't expect them to be even close. In the Stream section, you mention that the P4 has a faster front-side-bus.. Faster than what? The AMD64 system doesn't have a frontside bus inbetween the cpu and memory. The big difference though is that your AMD64 machine has a single 3.2GB/sec max memory controller, while the P4 has a dual-channel memory controller. In other words, the AMD64 machine is getting half of the memory bandwidth of the P4 due to the DIMM configuration. I'd be interested to see what happens if you compared the dual-channel Pentium-4 configuration to a dual-channel Athlon-FX, or a single channel Pentium-4 configuration to a single channel Athlon64. I'd be fascinated to see what happened if you ran a second set of tests with a single memory DIMM for a more level playing field. At the very least you should make a mention of this. It should be rather interesting to point out that the single-channel athlon64 had the upper hand in those tests compared to the dual-channel configuration P4. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 10:35:45 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC2116A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:35:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from curacao.n2it.nl (62-177-157-186.bbeyond.nl [62.177.157.186]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F340D43D39 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:35:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from billsf@curacao.n2it.nl) Received: by curacao.n2it.nl (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DB80D2057; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:35:43 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:35:43 +0100 From: Bill Squire To: freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <20040312183543.GC60405@curacao.n2it.nl> References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:35:45 -0000 On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 02:01:50PM +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote: > Jem Matzan wrote: > > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an > > Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: > > > > http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php > > > > (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published > > article) > > > > I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other > > eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked it > > yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I haven't > > made any factual errors. > > I like the article very much. Well done. I also appre- > ciate the fact that you refrained from spoiling the compa- > rison with colorful graphics. :-) > > There are just two things which seem a bit unclear to me. > > In the very first paragraph it sounds like hyperthreading > would always be a performance win, but that's not the case. > I've had applications that ran slightly faster when hyper- > threading was turned off. If I remember correctly, soft- > ware that does many concurrent things and I/O benefits most > from hyperthreading, while pure numbercrunching jobs run > faster with hyperthreading switched off. (I'm not saying > that you should repeat all your benchmarks with hyper- > threading off, mind you. I just think that the remark in > the first paragraph sounds a little bit misleading. YMMV.) > > The second point is that the gcc "benchmark" seems a bit > unfair for me, because you're really measuring _different_ > things when compiling something for i386 and for amd64. > The compiler is producing different code, it has to opti- > mize differently (particularly because of the different > register sets of the processors), so you can't really > compare the results. Also take into account that the amd64 > code generation engine of gcc is rather new, while the i386 > code generation is very mature. Apart from that, I would > rather call this "benchmark" synthetic, because nobody buys > an Opteron to compile things all day long. Well, except > for the FreeBSD package building people, maybe. :-) > > In relation to that, the oggenc benchmark is certainly much > more realistic. It would have been nice to have some video > decoding / encoding benchmarks, too (e.g. mplayer / menco- > der, transcode, ffmpeg, whatever). > > Well, just my 2 cents. :-) > > Regards > Oliver > Hi Oliver, Your name seems familiar to me. Anyways, as far as benchmarks there is allot of 'snake oil' for salesmen out there. This is the coolest bench mark for hardware I've ever seen. It is extremely technical and do understand it or limit your experiment. Good luck, (everyone -- this is fun stuff) Bill PS: My EUR 0,02 worth (Actually free and ALLOT of time went into getting this right.) You should be able to get 4M (2^22) digits of pi in about 2:22s with a single amd64 running at 2.22GHz. :) The performance rating of a well tuned amd64 is over 5600, the beat Intel barely gets 3000 and uh won't spoil the fun, but "The fastest desktop ever" (as the ads in the sheepish trash once read.) Will not likely beat the Intel, but I don't waste my time on closed source. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 10:41:33 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 849F016A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:41:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from host12.the-web-host.com (host12.the-web-host.com [209.239.40.67]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26CE543D39 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:41:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from stephen@stephendurham.com) Received: from satellite (69-162-52-225.stcgpa.adelphia.net [69.162.52.225]) i2CIfWlg029865 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:41:32 -0500 From: Stephen Durham To: AMD64 FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <2495DDA6-7450-11D8-B264-000A9576014E@cam.ac.uk> References: <2495DDA6-7450-11D8-B264-000A9576014E@cam.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1079160060.13141.2.camel@home> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:41:00 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:41:33 -0000 Hello, I used 5.2.1-Release (amd64 version) and had no problems with Gnome 2.4 and Xfree86. Well some such as no epiphany browser but everything else works fine. I have an Nvidia graphics card and use the Nvidia 64bit drivers. Thanks, Stephen On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 13:07, Bin Ren wrote: > Hi, > > Has anyone successfully installed XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 > on 5.2-current? The ports seem to be broken. Besides, my > graphics card is ATI Radeon 9600. It seems XFree86 can > provide 'vga' driver for it. > > Thanks, > Bin > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 11:05:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32ED716A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:05:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from dogfood.jrv.org (rrcs-sw-24-73-246-106.biz.rr.com [24.73.246.106]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C526243D1D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:05:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from james@jrv.org) Received: from jrv.org ([192.168.3.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by dogfood.jrv.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2CJ5RHP037375 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:05:27 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from james@jrv.org) Message-ID: <405209FB.7020108@jrv.org> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:05:31 -0600 From: "James R. Van Artsalen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Wemm References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> <200403121025.28913.peter@wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <200403121025.28913.peter@wemm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Jem Matzan cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:05:43 -0000 Peter Wemm wrote: >The OpenSSL stuff in the FreeBSD source tree has hand-optimized i386 >assembler code in it. The amd64 configuration of the integrated >OpenSSL uses the generic C code. Given this, I wouldn't expect them to >be even close. > > > Is this worth fixing? I could do this: there's no rocket science involved in porting the existing x86 code. The main drawback is maintainability: nobody wants Yet Another Cryptic .S file to maintain. But if the Powers That Be are willing to take an assembly file for these things and it's believed likely to be worthwhile I can take a look. To be honest I'm not sure I'd want to add to the maintainability problem here. The kernel IPsec crypto routines might be a better win, except that nobody has complained about it yet. No way is a .S worth it without complaints. PS. The IP checksum routine is another one that could be improved. It's doing 32 bits at a time right now, with no PREFETCH opcodes. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 11:44:23 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29D7F16A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:44:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB0A243D2D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:44:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 60142 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 19:43:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 19:43:42 -0000 Message-ID: <4052130E.9060601@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:44:14 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> <4051B7D3.8020404@thejemreport.com> <20040312174736.GD7661@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> In-Reply-To: <20040312174736.GD7661@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:44:23 -0000 Brooks Davis wrote: >On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: > > >>Hyper-Threading seemed to help with processes that didn't require a >>heavy CPU load. The OpenSSL tests show it being markedly faster in the >>smaller algorithms, but lagging way behind the 64-bit Athlon64 when the >>serious number crunching comes into play. Intel's press kit shows HT >>(and SSE3) giving an advantage when multitasking with four desktop >>programs in Windows XP. It's just too hard to show that reliably though. >>There's a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that AMD64 is faster on >>the desktop (in X) in 64-bit mode than the Prescott is in 32-bit, but >>I'm having trouble proving it. >> >> > >I think it would be a mistake to assume the HT is what accounts for >the performance difference. There are so many other architectural >differences it's hard to see how you could isolate the effects of >HT. My suspicition is that better performance on small >algorithms is due to them being more or less memory bound (and thus >similar to the pure synthetic benchmarks). > >-- Brooks > > > By comparing the Pentium4 to the Athlon64 in i386 mode, you can better see the advantage of HT Technology. This is especially evident in the OpenSSL tests. -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 11:46:01 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 802E416A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:46:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3F2E943D45 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:46:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 60803 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 19:45:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 19:45:20 -0000 Message-ID: <40521370.5030806@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:45:52 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> <20040312181837.GD56805@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040312181837.GD56805@funkthat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:46:01 -0000 John-Mark Gurney wrote: >Jem Matzan wrote this message on Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 07:08 -0500: > > >>I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an >>Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: >> >>http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php >> >>(this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published >>article) >> >> > >A comment on the article, you mention: >Curiously the Pentium4 times are impossible; according to the numbers for -j3 and -j4, it takes longer to execute the utility than it does to complete the entire process. This is either a bug in the time command (in relation to multithreading, perhaps), or something isn't reporting properly. > >You said that you enabled HyperThreading, and THIS is the reason for >the imposible times. Since w/ HT it appears as if there are two cpus >and two processes are running on each of these CPU's, you end up with >a user time that can be 2x real time. > >Hope this helps. > > > Thanks -- I'll change the article to reflect that. I was hoping someone would shed some light on why the user time was off like that... -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 12:00:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F8516A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:00:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (Odin.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.32.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373EC43D1F for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:00:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brdavis@odin.ac.hmc.edu) Received: from odin.ac.hmc.edu (IDENT:brdavis@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i2CK00aN001798; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:00:03 -0800 Received: (from brdavis@localhost) by odin.ac.hmc.edu (8.12.10/8.12.3/Submit) id i2CJxxpw001776; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:59:59 -0800 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:59:59 -0800 From: Brooks Davis To: Jem Matzan Message-ID: <20040312195958.GA32345@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> References: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> <4051B7D3.8020404@thejemreport.com> <20040312174736.GD7661@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <4052130E.9060601@thejemreport.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gKMricLos+KVdGMg" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4052130E.9060601@thejemreport.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) on odin.ac.hmc.edu cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:00:19 -0000 --gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 02:44:14PM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: > Brooks Davis wrote: >=20 > >On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: > >=20 > > > >>Hyper-Threading seemed to help with processes that didn't require a=20 > >>heavy CPU load. The OpenSSL tests show it being markedly faster in the= =20 > >>smaller algorithms, but lagging way behind the 64-bit Athlon64 when the= =20 > >>serious number crunching comes into play. Intel's press kit shows HT=20 > >>(and SSE3) giving an advantage when multitasking with four desktop=20 > >>programs in Windows XP. It's just too hard to show that reliably though= =2E=20 > >>There's a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that AMD64 is faster on= =20 > >>the desktop (in X) in 64-bit mode than the Prescott is in 32-bit, but= =20 > >>I'm having trouble proving it. > >> =20 > >> > > > >I think it would be a mistake to assume the HT is what accounts for > >the performance difference. There are so many other architectural > >differences it's hard to see how you could isolate the effects of > >HT. My suspicition is that better performance on small=20 > >algorithms is due to them being more or less memory bound (and thus > >similar to the pure synthetic benchmarks). > > > By comparing the Pentium4 to the Athlon64 in i386 mode, you can better=20 > see the advantage of HT Technology. This is especially evident in the=20 > OpenSSL tests. I strongly disagree. All you can see is that they differ. The architectural differences between P4 CPUs and current generation amd64 CPUs are a whole lot more then HT. You've got a different memory memory system, vastly different pipeline lengths, etc. For that matter, on paper at least, I wouldn't expect HT to help much if any in this situation since you're not trying to do two things at once. -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUha9XY6L6fI4GtQRAokIAKCycB2+Tzi3ArakGZCGqThmJ25MLQCdHpdR jKUiWEUi00s/FRIDbShYIYY= =99Tq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gKMricLos+KVdGMg-- From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 12:16:41 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF9416A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:16:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from dogfood.jrv.org (rrcs-sw-24-73-246-106.biz.rr.com [24.73.246.106]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF3D543D1F for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:16:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from james@jrv.org) Received: from jrv.org ([192.168.3.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by dogfood.jrv.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2CKGQqg039794 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:16:27 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from james@jrv.org) Message-ID: <40521A9E.8070808@jrv.org> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:16:30 -0600 From: "James R. Van Artsalen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> In-Reply-To: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:16:41 -0000 Jem Matzan wrote: > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between > an Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: Intel would be thrilled were Prescott to "idle" at 60 F anywhere other than outdoors in an Antarctic winter: alas, 60 C sounds more likely (but still seems astoundingly high for a halted processor). Your Prescott probably isn't doctored, but it is the case that early steppings of a CPU are always faster than later steppings: bug fixes to the silicon or control store patches by ROM POST rarely speed it up. The Prescott performance variation may indeed be due to thermal issues. I think Prescott slows down in response to thermal overload (AMD just enters a non-resumable halt - AMD's is a safety mechanism to protect the motherboard and CPU). It is not out of the question that Prescotts is regularly bumping up against thermal limits and running slow briefly. I find this hard to believe, but no harder to believe than a 60 C halted processor... Test by *lightly* preheating CPU cooler air intake with a well-aimed hairdryer to and see if that hurts performance. It may be worth mentioning that theoretically the usual win from 64-bit mode comes not from the fact that registers and reg ops are 64 bit but rather because more registers are available when in 64-bit mode. This is a huge win for a compiler which is nearly asphyxiated in register allocation by the i386. It might be worth mentioning that a powerful differentiator (between i386 and amd64 is maximum memory. With AMD64 you can keep on adding RAM after 4 GB as long as it wins. A database-driven web site might win substantially by having an 8 GB resident working set *in-process*. The max for i386 is around 3 GB; the practical max for amd64 is about 15 GB and growing (Tyan Thunder K8W with 8x 2GB DIMMs). This is beyond the scope of your tests but might be worth mentioning. From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 12:27:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED6EF16A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:27:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D2E8043D46 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:27:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 80461 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 20:26:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 20:26:29 -0000 Message-ID: <40521D10.7060204@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:26:56 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> <40521A9E.8070808@jrv.org> In-Reply-To: <40521A9E.8070808@jrv.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:27:10 -0000 James R. Van Artsalen wrote: > Jem Matzan wrote: > >> I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between >> an Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: > > > Intel would be thrilled were Prescott to "idle" at 60 F anywhere other > than outdoors in an Antarctic winter: alas, 60 C sounds more likely > (but still seems astoundingly high for a halted processor). > > Your Prescott probably isn't doctored, but it is the case that early > steppings of a CPU are always faster than later steppings: bug fixes > to the silicon or control store patches by ROM POST rarely speed it up. > > The Prescott performance variation may indeed be due to thermal > issues. I think Prescott slows down in response to thermal overload > (AMD just enters a non-resumable halt - AMD's is a safety mechanism to > protect the motherboard and CPU). It is not out of the question that > Prescotts is regularly bumping up against thermal limits and running > slow briefly. I find this hard to believe, but no harder to believe > than a 60 C halted processor... Test by *lightly* preheating CPU > cooler air intake with a well-aimed hairdryer to and see if that hurts > performance. > > It may be worth mentioning that theoretically the usual win from > 64-bit mode comes not from the fact that registers and reg ops are 64 > bit but rather because more registers are available when in 64-bit > mode. This is a huge win for a compiler which is nearly asphyxiated > in register allocation by the i386. > > It might be worth mentioning that a powerful differentiator (between > i386 and amd64 is maximum memory. With AMD64 you can keep on adding > RAM after 4 GB as long as it wins. A database-driven web site might > win substantially by having an 8 GB resident working set > *in-process*. The max for i386 is around 3 GB; the practical max for > amd64 is about 15 GB and growing (Tyan Thunder K8W with 8x 2GB > DIMMs). This is beyond the scope of your tests but might be worth > mentioning. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > Doh -- yes, that's a mistake on my part, should be 60 degrees C, not F. More like ~144 degrees F. I wish I could reliably measure the temperature under load in FreeBSD. I could do it in Windows but the software temp readers are sometimes very inaccurate. Intel included a special dashboard utility with the press kit (probably standard issue for the Prescott retail processors on the driver CD) but I didn't try it out. I'll add this information to the article -- thanks. -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 12:31:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2284F16A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:31:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 058E543D39 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:31:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 82652 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 20:30:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 20:30:54 -0000 Message-ID: <40521E1E.4060502@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:31:26 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <4051A841.9020205@thejemreport.com> <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> <20040312183543.GC60405@curacao.n2it.nl> In-Reply-To: <20040312183543.GC60405@curacao.n2it.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:31:36 -0000 Bill Squire wrote: >On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 02:01:50PM +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > >>Jem Matzan wrote: >> > I've just finished writing this article comparing performance between an >> > Athlon64 in 32-bit and 64-bit mode using FreeBSD: >> > >> > http://www.thejemreport.com/lab64/amd64vsi386.php >> > >> > (this is a temporary address which will later redirect to the published >> > article) >> > >> > I've checked it over twice for fact accuracy, but I would like other >> > eyes to look at it before it goes to press. I haven't spell-checked it >> > yet, so don't worry about that... I just want to make sure I haven't >> > made any factual errors. >> >>I like the article very much. Well done. I also appre- >>ciate the fact that you refrained from spoiling the compa- >>rison with colorful graphics. :-) >> >>There are just two things which seem a bit unclear to me. >> >>In the very first paragraph it sounds like hyperthreading >>would always be a performance win, but that's not the case. >>I've had applications that ran slightly faster when hyper- >>threading was turned off. If I remember correctly, soft- >>ware that does many concurrent things and I/O benefits most >>from hyperthreading, while pure numbercrunching jobs run >>faster with hyperthreading switched off. (I'm not saying >>that you should repeat all your benchmarks with hyper- >>threading off, mind you. I just think that the remark in >>the first paragraph sounds a little bit misleading. YMMV.) >> >>The second point is that the gcc "benchmark" seems a bit >>unfair for me, because you're really measuring _different_ >>things when compiling something for i386 and for amd64. >>The compiler is producing different code, it has to opti- >>mize differently (particularly because of the different >>register sets of the processors), so you can't really >>compare the results. Also take into account that the amd64 >>code generation engine of gcc is rather new, while the i386 >>code generation is very mature. Apart from that, I would >>rather call this "benchmark" synthetic, because nobody buys >>an Opteron to compile things all day long. Well, except >>for the FreeBSD package building people, maybe. :-) >> >>In relation to that, the oggenc benchmark is certainly much >>more realistic. It would have been nice to have some video >>decoding / encoding benchmarks, too (e.g. mplayer / menco- >>der, transcode, ffmpeg, whatever). >> >>Well, just my 2 cents. :-) >> >>Regards >> Oliver >> >> >> > >Hi Oliver, > >Your name seems familiar to me. Anyways, as far as benchmarks there is >allot of 'snake oil' for salesmen out there. This is the coolest bench >mark for hardware I've ever seen. It is extremely technical and do >understand it or limit your experiment. > > >Good luck, (everyone -- this is fun stuff) > >Bill > >PS: My EUR 0,02 worth (Actually free and ALLOT of time went into getting >this right.) You should be able to get 4M (2^22) digits of pi in about >2:22s with a single amd64 running at 2.22GHz. :) The performance rating >of a well tuned amd64 is over 5600, the beat Intel barely gets 3000 and >uh won't spoil the fun, but "The fastest desktop ever" (as the ads in the >sheepish trash once read.) Will not likely beat the Intel, but I don't >waste my time on closed source. > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > Alas it's not in ports... I'd rather have a standard version to go from, knowing that the code will work well with FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE. It looks like a good test though; I'm going to try it out anyway for my next round of testing. I'm particularly interested in valid tests that can accurately show performance differences between architectures. -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 12:33:29 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 434D216A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:33:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from host142.ipowerweb.com (host142.ipowerweb.com [66.235.193.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E14143D2D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 12:33:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from valour@thejemreport.com) Received: (qmail 83491 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2004 20:32:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thejemreport.com) (66.67.130.234) by host142.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2004 20:32:48 -0000 Message-ID: <40521E90.8090102@thejemreport.com> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:33:20 -0500 From: Jem Matzan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040219 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <200403121301.i2CD1oQC076505@lurza.secnetix.de> <4051B7D3.8020404@thejemreport.com> <20040312174736.GD7661@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <4052130E.9060601@thejemreport.com> <20040312195958.GA32345@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> In-Reply-To: <20040312195958.GA32345@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Peer review of AMD64/FreeBSD article X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:33:29 -0000 Brooks Davis wrote: >On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 02:44:14PM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: > > >>Brooks Davis wrote: >> >> >> >>>On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hyper-Threading seemed to help with processes that didn't require a >>>>heavy CPU load. The OpenSSL tests show it being markedly faster in the >>>>smaller algorithms, but lagging way behind the 64-bit Athlon64 when the >>>>serious number crunching comes into play. Intel's press kit shows HT >>>>(and SSE3) giving an advantage when multitasking with four desktop >>>>programs in Windows XP. It's just too hard to show that reliably though. >>>>There's a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that AMD64 is faster on >>>>the desktop (in X) in 64-bit mode than the Prescott is in 32-bit, but >>>>I'm having trouble proving it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>I think it would be a mistake to assume the HT is what accounts for >>>the performance difference. There are so many other architectural >>>differences it's hard to see how you could isolate the effects of >>>HT. My suspicition is that better performance on small >>>algorithms is due to them being more or less memory bound (and thus >>>similar to the pure synthetic benchmarks). >>> >>> >>> >>By comparing the Pentium4 to the Athlon64 in i386 mode, you can better >>see the advantage of HT Technology. This is especially evident in the >>OpenSSL tests. >> >> > >I strongly disagree. All you can see is that they differ. The >architectural differences between P4 CPUs and current generation amd64 >CPUs are a whole lot more then HT. You've got a different memory memory >system, vastly different pipeline lengths, etc. For that matter, >on paper at least, I wouldn't expect HT to help much if any in this >situation since you're not trying to do two things at once. > >-- Brooks > > > I'm pretty sure I did mention that, but I'll go over the article to make sure it's clear that the reason why there is a performance difference could be due to a number of factors (which are listed here). -Jem From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 13:51:20 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B8A16A4CF for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:51:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from orange.csi.cam.ac.uk (orange.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.77]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C2C43D41 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:51:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from br260@cam.ac.uk) Received: from br260.wolfson.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.242.109] helo=[192.168.0.2]) by orange.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B1uYo-0000SM-00; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 21:51:18 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1079160060.13141.2.camel@home> References: <2495DDA6-7450-11D8-B264-000A9576014E@cam.ac.uk> <1079160060.13141.2.camel@home> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bin Ren To: Stephen Durham X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) cc: AMD64 FreeBSD Subject: Re: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 21:51:20 -0000 X-Original-Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1970 04:11:57 +0100 X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 21:51:20 -0000 Hi, I can install XFree86 4.3 by binary. But I can only find 'vga' driver to work for my ATI Radeon 9600. I tried both 'vesa' and 'ati' but both with error 'no screen found. no device driver ...' With 'vga' driver, the resolution is formidable '640x480'. Any suggestion for ATI users? With 5.2-current i386 version, I use 'vesa' as XFree86 version and with resolution 1280x1024. Thanks Bin On 13 Mar 2004, at 06:41, Stephen Durham wrote: > Hello, > I used 5.2.1-Release (amd64 version) and had no problems with Gnome 2.4 > and Xfree86. Well some such as no epiphany browser but everything else > works fine. I have an Nvidia graphics card and use the Nvidia 64bit > drivers. > Thanks, > Stephen > > On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 13:07, Bin Ren wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Has anyone successfully installed XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 >> on 5.2-current? The ports seem to be broken. Besides, my >> graphics card is ATI Radeon 9600. It seems XFree86 can >> provide 'vga' driver for it. >> >> Thanks, >> Bin From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 13:59:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E4616A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:59:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from bragi.housing.ufl.edu (bragi.housing.ufl.edu [128.227.47.18]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25F743D1D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:59:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from WillS@housing.ufl.edu) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:59:17 -0500 Message-ID: <0E972CEE334BFE4291CD07E056C76ED802E8680B@bragi.housing.ufl.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 Thread-Index: AcQIfC7NRoe0YchmQeKccKlSmFVRbAAAI2iQ From: "Will Saxon" To: "Bin Ren" cc: AMD64 FreeBSD Subject: RE: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 21:59:24 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Bin Ren [mailto:br260@cam.ac.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 1969 10:12 PM > To: Stephen Durham > Cc: AMD64 FreeBSD > Subject: Re: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I can install XFree86 4.3 by binary. But I can only find 'vga' driver=20 > to work > for my ATI Radeon 9600. I tried both 'vesa' and 'ati' but both with=20 > error > 'no screen found. no device driver ...' With 'vga' driver, the=20 > resolution is > formidable '640x480'. Any suggestion for ATI users? >=20 > With 5.2-current i386 version, I use 'vesa' as XFree86=20 > version and with > resolution 1280x1024. >=20 > Thanks > Bin Have you tried the radeon driver? There isn't any 3d support for the = 9600, but 2D is supposed to work correctly. I have a 9100 and I had to specify a ChipID in XF86Config to get it to = work right - I don't know if this also has to happen with the 9600. -Will From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 12 14:01:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CBB416A4CE for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:01:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from chaos.fxp.org (chaos.fxp.org [209.251.159.150]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56FA843D2D for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:01:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jedgar@fxp.org) Received: by chaos.fxp.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4AC054F9; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:01:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 17:01:07 -0500 From: Chris Faulhaber To: Bin Ren Message-ID: <20040312220106.GJ93883@chaos.fxp.org> References: <2495DDA6-7450-11D8-B264-000A9576014E@cam.ac.uk> <1079160060.13141.2.camel@home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: socket() cc: AMD64 FreeBSD Subject: Re: XFree86 and Gnome 2.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 22:01:08 -0000 On Thu, Jan 01, 1970 at 04:11:57AM +0100, Bin Ren wrote: > Hi, > > I can install XFree86 4.3 by binary. But I can only find 'vga' driver > to work > for my ATI Radeon 9600. I tried both 'vesa' and 'ati' but both with > error > 'no screen found. no device driver ...' With 'vga' driver, the > resolution is > formidable '640x480'. Any suggestion for ATI users? > > With 5.2-current i386 version, I use 'vesa' as XFree86 version and with > resolution 1280x1024. > Newer Radeons require XFree >= 3.99.x. Try either using the x11-servers/XFree86-4-Server-snap port or compile the recent XFree 4.4.0 release manually. -- Chris D. Faulhaber - jedgar@fxp.org - jedgar@FreeBSD.org -------------------------------------------------------- FreeBSD: The Power To Serve - http://www.FreeBSD.org From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 13 13:39:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C53C16A4CE for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:39:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from canning.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 088C643D1F for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:39:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@evilpete.dyndns.org) Received: from fw.wemm.org (canning.wemm.org [192.203.228.65]) by canning.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC3C12A92B for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:39:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@overcee.wemm.org) Received: from overcee.wemm.org (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by fw.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDD6DE296 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:39:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@overcee.wemm.org) Received: from overcee.wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2DLcxTM007092; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:38:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@overcee.wemm.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by overcee.wemm.org (8.12.11/8.12.10/Submit) id i2DLcwYW007091; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:38:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter) From: Peter Wemm To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:38:56 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: <200402181230.11078.adridg@cs.kun.nl> <200402242111.39048.adridg@cs.kun.nl> In-Reply-To: <200402242111.39048.adridg@cs.kun.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200403131338.57718.peter@wemm.org> cc: Adriaan de Groot Subject: Re: The return of threading errors in ogg123 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 21:39:35 -0000 On Tuesday 24 February 2004 12:11 pm, Adriaan de Groot wrote: > On Wednesday 18 February 2004 12:30, Adriaan de Groot wrote: > > libc_r seems solid as a rock; libpthread can play ok for a while > > but seems to bail as soon as there is some load on the system. > > libpth doesn't work at all, missing a pthread_push_create symbol. > > Any gdb trickery I can use on the core files to get more useful > > information out of them over the short bt? > > ogg123 with libc_r played 1500 tracks without a hitch (all ripped > from the CDs off my self, thanks); with libpthread (ie. kse) it takes > a little prodding, but then it dumps core: > > Playing: TomCochrane/02-LoveUnderFire.ogg > Ogg Vorbis stream: 2 channel, 44100 Hz > Title: Love Under Fire > Artist: Tom Cochrane > Bus error (core dumped)5] of 04:48.17 (119.7 kbps) Output Buffer > 96.9% > > (still with the same FreeBSD beans.ebn.kun.nl 5.2-CURRENT FreeBSD > 5.2-CURRENT #0: Mon Feb 16 08:12:04 CET 2004 > root@beans.ebn.kun.nl:/usr/obj/mnt/sys/CURRENT/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 > ) > > > It crashes here: > > #0 0x0000000200f19320 in pthread_testcancel () from > /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1 > > with this disassembly: > > 0x0000000200f19307 : nop > 0x0000000200f19308 : mov > 1085185(%rip),%rcx # 0x201022210 > 0x0000000200f1930f : jmpq *%ecx > 0x0000000200f19311 : nop > 0x0000000200f19312 : nop > 0x0000000200f19313 : nop > 0x0000000200f19314 : mov $0x17e,%rax > 0x0000000200f1931b : mov %rcx,%r10 > 0x0000000200f1931e : syscall > 0x0000000200f19320 : jb 0x200f19308 > > 0x0000000200f19322 : retq > 0x0000000200f19323 : nop > 0x0000000200f19324 : mov > 1085157(%rip),%rcx > > > Not a place that looks like erroring. However: > > (gdb) print $rsp > $1 = (void *) 0x51eeb8 > (gdb) print $rbp > $2 = (void *) 0x51ef80 > > looks like the stack-16-alignment has gotten broken again somewhere. Are you still having problems with this? I've been trying to reproduce it for a while, but I'm having no success. I figure the best way to make sure I can see it in action is to make a post saying I can't reproduce it. :-) I'm using SCHED_ULE fwiw. -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 13 13:54:23 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D67AB16A4CE for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:54:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from pandora.cs.kun.nl (pandora.cs.kun.nl [131.174.33.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD0FC43D2F for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:54:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adridg@cs.kun.nl) Received: from odin.cs.kun.nl [131.174.33.33] (helo=localhost) by pandora.cs.kun.nl (8.12.10/3.67) with ESMTP id i2DLsK0s011977 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:54:21 +0100 (MET) From: Adriaan de Groot To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:54:13 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.51 References: <200402242111.39048.adridg@cs.kun.nl> <200403131338.57718.peter@wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <200403131338.57718.peter@wemm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="Boundary-00=_FM4UArrgrdZpvTN" Message-Id: <200403132254.20476.adridg@cs.kun.nl> Subject: Re: The return of threading errors in ogg123 X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 21:54:24 -0000 --Boundary-00=_FM4UArrgrdZpvTN Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 13 March 2004 22:38, you wrote: > Are you still having problems with this? I've been trying to reproduce > it for a while, but I'm having no success. I figure the best way to > make sure I can see it in action is to make a post saying I can't > reproduce it. :-) > > I'm using SCHED_ULE fwiw. Lessee, I'm on: * uname -a =46reeBSD beans.ebn.kun.nl 5.2-CURRENT FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT #0: Mon Feb 16=20 08:12:04 CET 2004 =20 root@beans.ebn.kun.nl:/usr/obj/mnt/sys/CURRENT/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 * GENERIC contains: options SCHED_ULE # ULE scheduler * libmap.conf contains: libpthread.so.1 libc_r.so I suppose -CURRENT from almost a month ago could be considered ag=E9d, but = it's=20 not compiling world today due to PAM trouble (see attachment). Now, commenting out the libmap.conf entry, so that it goes libpthread.so.1 =3D> /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1 (0x200ef3000) instead of libpthread.so.1 =3D> /usr/lib/libc_r.so (0x200ef3000) gets me the following: at least the first 30 seconds of Exercise One before= I=20 ^C out of ogg123; and then the next second: beans.ebn.kun.nl$ogg123 -d oss JoyDivision/*.ogg Audio Device: OSS audio driver output Bus error (core dumped) and a bt of=20 (gdb) bt #0 0x0000000200f19320 in pthread_testcancel () from /usr/lib/libpthread.so= =2E1 #1 0x0000000200f10d68 in pthread_mutexattr_init () from /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1 #2 0x0000000200f0f0ed in pthread_mutexattr_init () from /usr/lib/libpthread.so.1 #3 0xd0d0d0d0d0d0d0d0 in ?? () I wasn't actively worrying about it anymore, since libc_r seems to work=20 properly. =2D --=20 pub 1024D/FEA2A3FE 2002-06-18 Adriaan de Groot Would you like a freem? =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAU4MMdqzuAf6io/4RAl2yAKCRAFBrgiO6V8W/m+GmbhqQ62ZG4gCfRyNS TuILCPwM2WP+ruCJGgxGjU8=3D =3DAWXH =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-00=_FM4UArrgrdZpvTN Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; name="pam" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="pam" ../modules/pam_deny/libpam_deny.a(pam_deny.o): In function `pam_sm_open_session' : /mnt/sys/CURRENT/src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_deny/pam_deny.c:80: multiple definit ion of `pam_sm_open_session' ../modules/pam_chroot/libpam_chroot.a(pam_chroot.o):/mnt/sys/CURRENT/src/lib/lib pam/modules/pam_chroot/pam_chroot.c:54: first defined here ld: Warning: size of symbol `pam_sm_open_session' changed from 661 to 25 in ../m odules/pam_deny/libpam_deny.a(pam_deny.o) ../modules/pam_deny/libpam_deny.a(pam_deny.o): In function `pam_sm_close_session ': /mnt/sys/CURRENT/src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_deny/pam_deny.c:88: multiple definit ion of `pam_sm_close_session' --Boundary-00=_FM4UArrgrdZpvTN--