On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 01:51:18PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 09:03:49PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > So my opinion did not changed, this sounds like firmware problem. > > I do not see how can I drill into it more. > > I am don't know how it related. msgbufp mapped different with and w/o > memory test: > > w/o memory test, hang: > msgbufp=0xfffff8207ff00000 pa_indx=7 phys_avail[pa_indx]=207ff00000 > > w/ memory test, boot: > msgbufp=0xfffff8203ff00000 pa_indx=7 phys_avail[pa_indx]=203ff00000 Interesting. Can you show me - the output of the smap command from the loader (yes, I know it was already shown, I want it in the same mail as the data below for convenience); - the output of sysctl machdep.smap after the succesfull boot with the memtest enabled. Possibly, the dmesg of the boot (with late_console=0) with this and only this patch applied against stock HEAD. This might be long. diff --git a/sys/amd64/amd64/machdep.c b/sys/amd64/amd64/machdep.c index 682307f5fe4..072c8d76acf 100644 --- a/sys/amd64/amd64/machdep.c +++ b/sys/amd64/amd64/machdep.c _at__at_ -1400,6 +1400,7 _at__at_ getmemsize(caddr_t kmdp, u_int64_t first) */ *(int *)ptr = tmp; +if (page_bad) printf("pb 0x%lx\n", pa); skip_memtest: /* * Adjust array of valid/good pages.Received on Thu Dec 15 2016 - 11:33:39 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:09 UTC