Re: Difference between 6.2 and 7.0 Adaptec 39320D - 7.0 performing less

On Wed, April 18, 2007 22:51, Scott Long wrote:
> Gelsema, P (Patrick) wrote:
>> On Tuesday 17 April 2007 18:24, Scott Long wrote:
>>> Gelsema, P (Patrick) - FreeBSD wrote:
>>>> On Tue, April 17, 2007 16:45, Scott Long wrote:
>>>>> Gelsema, P (Patrick) - FreeBSD wrote:
>>>> <SNAP></SNAP>
>>>>
>>>>> The 39320D is a finicky card.  I don't recall putting in the code
>>>>> that
>>>>> would downshift the speed like this, but it wouldn't surprise me if
>>>>> it
>>>>> is a side effect of the system going slower.  Anyways, it sounds like
>>>>> you're a good candidate/victim for the MPSAFE locking changes that I
>>>>> just made to the SCSI layer and the ahc/ahd drivers.  Would you mind
>>>>> testing it out (just update to the latest 7-CURRENT sources) and let
>>>>> me
>>>>> know how it works for you?
>> <SNAP></SNAP>
>>
>>>> Is building world/kernel sufficient as test or do you want me to do
>>>> more
>>>> tests?
>>> Any amount of testing that you can do is appreciated.  Even verifying
>>> that it boots is helpful =-)
>>
>> Cvsupped this evening at about 6.15 UTC time (20:15 CET zone)
>> FreeBSD hulk.superhero.nl 7.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT #0: Wed Apr 18
>> 21:56:58 CEST 2007
>> root_at_hulk.superhero.nl:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC
>> amd64
>>
>> After buildworld and the whole lot the computer boots fine, however the
>> disk
>> is still detected as only 160.00MB/s.
>>
>> I do get the following crash. It seems to be related to pressing scroll
>> lock
>> on the console and hitting the page up/down buttons. When I just log on
>> locally or remotely it seems to be ok. When I hit the scroll lock key
>> before
>> or after logging on I get the below crash.
>>
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: lock order reversal: (Giant after
>> non-sleepable)
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: 1st 0xffffff007b413358 ahd_lock (ahd_lock)
>> _at_ /usr/src/sys/cam/cam_periph.c:559
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: 2nd 0xffffffff80977f20 Giant (Giant)
>> _at_ /usr/src/sys/vm/vm_contig.c:590
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: KDB: stack backtrace:
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: db_trace_self_wrapper() at
>> db_trace_self_wrapper+0x3a
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: witness_checkorder() at
>> witness_checkorder+0x4f9
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: _mtx_lock_flags() at _mtx_lock_flags+0x75
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: contigmalloc() at contigmalloc+0x63
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: bus_dmamem_alloc() at bus_dmamem_alloc+0x8d
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: ahd_alloc_scbs() at ahd_alloc_scbs+0x32a
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: ahd_get_scb() at ahd_get_scb+0x69
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: ahd_action() at ahd_action+0x47c
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: xpt_run_dev_sendq() at
>> xpt_run_dev_sendq+0x1ae
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: xpt_action() at xpt_action+0x4d3
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: dastart() at dastart+0x211
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: xpt_run_dev_allocq() at
>> xpt_run_dev_allocq+0xf4
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: dastrategy() at dastrategy+0x78
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: g_disk_start() at g_disk_start+0xe6
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: g_io_schedule_down() at
>> g_io_schedule_down+0x189
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: g_down_procbody() at g_down_procbody+0x7a
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: fork_exit() at fork_exit+0xaa
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: fork_trampoline() at fork_trampoline+0xe
>> Apr 18 22:08:22 hulk kernel: --- trap 0, rip = 0, rsp =
>> 0xffffffffac102d30,
>> rbp = 0 ---
>>
>> Is this information sufficient? If not please let me know what more is
>> required.
>>
>> Rgds,
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>
> Thanks for the info.  Fixing this problem is going to be a royal pain.
> You can probably get around it by disabling WITNESS and INVARIANTS.
>
> Scott

The computer seems to remain working even with the crash. Disabling
WINTNESS and INVARIANTS only disables the checking but not the actual
problem, is that correct?

If you want I can provide you full SSH access to the box to make working
on the fix of this problem easier? I am not using this box for anything
else than just toying, getting a better understanding. Just let me know.
HTH.

Also the disk is still detected as only 160.00MB/s, any thought about this?

Rgds,

Patrick