From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Sat Jun 16 23:13:26 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F0771001A09 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 23:13:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marklmi@yahoo.com) Received: from sonic310-15.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com (sonic310-15.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com [74.6.135.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C31D873212 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 23:13:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marklmi@yahoo.com) X-YMail-OSG: 9e4QaUgVM1kyEsQ6MjMaDdjBNJwbUxTsC_JsTHss1t6RmJsMvNkDWYeCVcdIlhO plSazYFZzEiUbf74rqD6mNMpTjZ6vfZETtaW8wBQzAAB7MW41rgFBx8kkjXKIPuV3_ra3eTwAQ2n weMC_h6GoitJTfFFvbh7wgEiDseu.qRk2g4nvoECgTt3gYOq_BhzQvVr9U2yd.1AFGy6rres2Hzy eoag7uKWYI4vSla6Hod0wUgd7vlr7zW2N8oWRdcm8cbnc0ukLw4SRv3baCq_Va1nSXXCfq0uRSuY JgqAV4hTJAW0c1YRsbHNwN4ooo0mO_zwtyX.CL03C2hb.t.at9RJOQkYIn880ix.nQ3oO8giX1vD 6W0JkioODr6x5WHYEaETefs5ilS0As5vgc7LHSrkEtObcXFCYAetoCGlogaSppy_WhDaU2lxukNI aTdO_KFYQJ6SYn72u5eg34fH5TPEC3y077HKJyN1pE9K8wXOM74ms7bivh4drpU.bK31_mSA.2gd R52H7Dic068iqwFsfzC8su_Xv7UT.Ibplns6uLYum0Cq.AApbwJT9IHs9ACApnHk2NtbQd8BjAiY RpyRtFk00aQMnC_m3zSMl_9XJSGvOW.9UsTknTT6l1lS.VeCjL.gaxYJHTfYPmVRjxyB4WorIYbK CBywO5h_iTQR3j7TBs8KufxvRHEZFAoqfBuDdEIscjwwJlVgtFt52UgQAYKzXapN9OqVTvC6go3m 2as4AVBlsAK8zBpYWlJxwxuYs9zNKPmbeOhllpu1.ufpmFCWLGslmGoRgEM6.c2uKjLq1DgoMW6v VmU6Axqz.aXFb95qjNpgSTZdgtvzgGcQT5frziF8pX69TpAiCBW_BhdsgsjCyLj9Aw3UNnaAZwKA TdK0aszgzRQs2X_jM2PfoDjWBgFaSbvLO4MAJoXr8BFoi0XQLJNwLpBgAJFlzviF._LbHpomOs2E J_aLjaODp Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic310.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 23:13:19 +0000 Received: from ip70-189-131-151.lv.lv.cox.net (EHLO [192.168.0.105]) ([70.189.131.151]) by smtp429.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (Oath Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID 4c74ae9bc7dbb008bf84d29a04978926; Sat, 16 Jun 2018 23:03:08 +0000 (UTC) From: Mark Millard Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\)) Subject: Re: GPT vs MBR for swap devices Message-Id: <7AB401DF-7AE4-409B-8263-719FD3D889E5@yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2018 16:03:06 -0700 To: bob prohaska , freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2018 23:13:26 -0000 bob prohaska fbsd at www.zefox.net wrote on Sat Jun 16 19:12:22 UTC 2018 (some by reference to other web pages, which is what I quote from here) : > Presently, the divided swap layout fails during -j4 buildworld with > "out of swap" kills during the more frantic portions of buildworld. > > When all swap is placed on a single 3 GB USB mechanical disk partition > the "out of swap" errors go away. Similarly, when swap is placed entirely > on the microSD card in two partitions, one the original 1 GB partition > plus a second 2 GB partition, the "out of swap" errors dissapear. Since the "multiple swap partitions across multiple devices" context (my description) is what has problems, it would be interesting to see swapinfo information from around the time frame of the failures: how much is used vs. available on each swap partition? Is only one being (significantly) used? The small one (1 GiByte)? A related, additional example to try? . . . Since you report needing around 1.2 GiByte of swap, what happens if you have a split but both devices have, say, 1.5 GiByte of swap space for the partition used? If I read right, you could shrink the 2GiByte microSD card partition and the 3 GiByte USB mechanical disk partition and then use that pair as a test. (This also avoids the message about having too much swap. Also, I'm avoiding having significant size differences between the partitions used.) Technically, without the split, either partition should be sufficient without the other involved. In such a context, does the split still fail? Or does it only fail when one partition is stoo small to be sufficient by itself? These suggestions are going a different direction than the I/O rate investigation but also having I/O rate information would not hurt. But I/O rate information can not substitute for the swapinfo output here. Nor can top cover what I'd be looking for: per partition usage figures are required, not just grand total swap-space usage. === Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar)