[kde-solaris] KDE 3.3.2, patches for 3.3.1 and some news :-)
Karsten Künne
kuenne at rentec.com
Wed Feb 9 17:21:53 CET 2005
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 10:23, Mats Rojestal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The patch submitted by Christopher is correct and discarding it as buggy
> is totally wrong. There is also a incorrect assumption from Stefan that
> you can add more than 2GB swap on a single slice to the system for
> example adding a 8GB slice as a swap is wasting 6GB of disk space due to
> the fact that Solaris so far can't make use of a single swap partition
> larger than 2GB. How ever you can make two or more 2GB swap partitions.
> Solaris swap is still 32 bit even on a 64 bit machine.
>
>
That's ONLY true for the first swap partition and I believe even that is fixed
now. Look at this output from "swap -l":
swapfile dev swaplo blocks free
/dev/dsk/c2t0d0s1 32,121 16 4099424 3976096
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P5-D0 229,19063 16 8388592 8212032
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P5-D1 229,19064 16 8388592 8203776
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P6-D0 229,19061 16 8388592 8214336
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P6-D1 229,19062 16 8388592 8212272
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P7-D0 229,19065 16 8388592 8220848
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P7-D1 229,19066 16 8388592 8211616
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P8-D0 229,19067 16 8388592 8207872
/dev/vx/dsk/T3-02/swap-T3-P8-D1 229,19008 16 8388592 8213312
The first partition is 2 GB, the others are 4 GB and it's a Solaris 8 system.
Now, if I start kinfocenter with Stefan's patches on that system the swap
numbers look kinda wrong. It reports 85.05 GB "total swap memory" and 84.00
GB "free swap memory" and the "total" number keeps changing which doesn't
make sense IMHO. The memory numbers are pretty close to reality (compared
with the "top" output) except that "total physical memory" is always 0 (the
system has 80GB physical memory). I didn't try the original version of
memory_solaris.cpp from Christopher.
Just my 0.02c
Karsten.
> --Mats R
>
> > On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 07:21:19AM -0500, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> >>> The point is that the patch you submitted was flat out wrong. And i
> >>> know for a fact that you were CC'ed on the emails i exchanged with
> >>> kde-core-devel about this back in December 2004.
> >>>
> >>> Everybody is welcome to submit patches as long as these patches make
> >>> things better, not worse.
> >>>
> >>> --Stefan
> >
> > Really.. flat out wrong?
> >
> > After slagging through kde-core-devel I found it. Gee, where's
> > the Cc: line where you apparently CC'd me on it? Yes - that's right
> > you didn't.
> >
> > Your mail to core-devel:
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Stefan Teleman <steleman at nyc.rr.com>
> > To: KDE Core Devel <kde-core-devel at kde.org>
> > Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 20:16:00 -0500
> > Subject: bad patch applied to kdebase/kcontrol/memory_solaris.cpp
> >
> >>From kde-core-devel-bounces-+clayne=anodized.com at kde.org Sat Dec 4
> >> 17:27:27 2004
> >
> > [-- Attachment #1 --]
> > [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 1.5K --]
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > A patch was applied to kdebase/kcontrol/memory_solaris.cpp between
> > 3.3.1 and 3.3.2.
> >
> > This patch (diff between 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 attached) is wrong. The
> > values reported by memory_solaris with this new patch are orders of
> > magnitude off reality.
> >
> > 1. sysconf(_SC_PHYS_PAGES) does not report the total number of pages
> > available to memory, just the number of pages in physical memory
> > (i.e. core RAM).
> > 2. swapctl (SC_AINFO, (void *) &struct anoninfo) reports wrong values.
> > A comment to this effect already exists in memory_solaris.cpp.
> >
> > Values reported by the new patch :
> >
> > total memory: 2097152 MB
> > total swap: 1546632 MB
> > free swap: 1131280 MB
> > used swap: 415852 MB
> >
> > swap -s reports:
> >
> > [steleman at obiwan][~/tmp][12/04/2004 20:22:21][3353]>> swap -s
> > total: 276296k bytes allocated + 138784k reserved = 415080k used,
> > 9520168k available
> >
> > This box has 2GB core RAM and 8GB swap. Total memory should be
> > reported as 2GB physical + 8GB swap. Total swap should be reported as
> > 8192 MB.
> >
> > The following #ifdef block is also wrong:
> >
> > /* Stop <sys/swap.h> from crapping out on 32-bit architectures. */
> >
> > #if !defined(_LP64) && _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 64
> > # undef _FILE_OFFSET_BITS
> > # define _FILE_OFFSET_BITS 32
> > #endif
> >
> > _FILE_OFFSET_BITS should *not* be redefined to 32. The error in
> > sys/procfs.h is fixed by making _FILE_OFFSET_BITS undefined in this
> > file only.
> >
> > The values reported by memory_solaris.cpp before this patch were
> > correct.
> >
> > --Stefan
> >
> > --
> > Stefan Teleman 'Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition'
> > steleman at nyc.rr.com -Monty Python
> > ---
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Now my comments:
> >
> > "1. sysconf(_SC_PHYS_PAGES) does not report the total number of pages
> > available to memory, just the number of pages in physical memory
> > (i.e. core RAM)."
> >
> > a. This is part of the real memory side of things which I never even
> > changed. This has *nothing* to do with the changes I made in the patch I
> > submitted. b. Either I'm stupid or not following you - but it's a
> > standard asumption that if you're providing both total MEMORY and total
> > SWAP in the same statistical area that it implies total MEMORY is REAL
> > MEMORY.
> >
> > "2. swapctl (SC_AINFO, (void *) &struct anoninfo) reports wrong values.
> > A comment to this effect already exists in memory_solaris.cpp."
> >
> > Wrong wrong wrong.
> >
> > At this moment, I'm looking at the Solaris 5.9 source code for swap.c and
> > various other VM related tools/libs and they're using the same structures
> > and methods as I did using anoninfo structs. Is Sun wrong too?
> >
> > Perhaps the comment you're referring to is the one *I* added - which did
> > not say what you paraphrased. In addition there were no comments present
> > in the code previous to my patching that dictated what you said above. Go
> > ahead and check out revision 1.3 of
> > kdebase/kcontrol/info/memory_solaris.cpp if you don't believe me.
> >
> > This was my comment added:
> >
> > /*
> > * Retrieve overall swap information from anonymous memory
> > structure - * which is the same way "swap -s" retrieves it's statistics.
> > *
> > * swapctl(SC_LIST, void *arg) does not return what we are
> > looking for. */
> >
> >
> > Anyways:
> >
> > [clayne at build02-sol8-x86 ~]$ swap -s
> > total: 605024k bytes allocated + 532732k reserved = 1137756k used,
> > 1748648k available
> >
> > Of which kinfocenter reports:
> >
> > TOTAL: 2955677696 = 2.75 GB
> > FREE: 1790738432 = 1.67 GB
> > USED: 1164939264 (using basic math)
> >
> > Divide all by 1024, we derive:
> >
> > USED: 1137636k
> > FREE: 1748768k
> >
> > So if you're referring to a 120k difference (when we're dealing with gigs
> > here) as "orders of magnitude off reality" I really don't know what to
> > tell you.
> >
> > "The values reported by memory_solaris.cpp before this patch were
> > correct."
> >
> > No they were not - which is why I wrote the patch in the first place.
> >
> > It's quite possible that the code still has issues with machines
> > utilizing greater than 4GB of swap. In the machine you list as having 8GB
> > as swap, is this a single 8 GB swap file, or multiple?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In regards to the _FILE_OFFSET_BITS issue:
> >
> > 1. Undefine, or set it to 32, it really doesn't matter in this case.
> > 2. I do remember this disussion which you NEVER replied to:
> >
> >
> >
> > From: steleman at nyc.rr.com
> > To: KDE Solaris <kde-solaris at mail.kde.org>
> > Cc: coolo at kde.org, kde-solaris at kde.org, deller at kde.org, waba at kde.org,
> > tk at Genetik.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
> > Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:09:20 -0400
> > Subject: Re: [kde-solaris] kdebase/kcontrol/info/memory_solaris.cpp patch
> >
> >>From kde-solaris-bounces-+clayne=anodized.com at mail.kde.org Tue Oct 19
> >> 20:21:16 2004
> >
> > [-- Attachment #1 --]
> > [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.8K --]
> >
> > This is only true for Solaris x86 which currently has no 64-bit support.
> > It is not true for Solaris SPARC. The patches should be #ifdef'd for
> > Solaris x86.
> >
> > --Stefan
> >
> > -----
> >
> >
> > From: Christopher Layne <clayne at anodized.com>
> > To: steleman at nyc.rr.com,
> > "For people using KDE on Solaris,\
> > with questions about KDE or Solaris" <kde-solaris at mail.kde.org>
> > Cc:
> > Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:22:54 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [kde-solaris] kdebase/kcontrol/info/memory_solaris.cpp patch
> >
> >>From kde-solaris-bounces-+clayne=anodized.com at mail.kde.org Wed Oct 20
> >> 00:23:40 2004
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 11:09:20PM -0400, steleman at nyc.rr.com wrote:
> >>> This is only true for Solaris x86 which currently has no 64-bit
> >>> support. It is not true for Solaris SPARC. The patches should be
> >>> #ifdef'd for Solaris x86.
> >>>
> >>> --Stefan
> >
> > I do not believe the above to be accurate.
> >
> > [clayne at build01-sol8-sparc ~]$ uname -a
> > SunOS build01-sol8-sparc.corp.tellme.com 5.8 Generic_108528-22 sun4u
> > sparc SUNW,UltraSPARC-IIi-cEngine
> >
> > [clayne at build01-sol8-sparc ~]$ egrep 'OFFSET_BITS|large files'
> > /usr/include/sys/swap.h #if !defined(_LP64) && _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 64
> > #error "Cannot use swapctl in the large files compilation environment"
> >
> > [clayne at sparc-hatch01 ~]$ uname -a
> > SunOS sparc-hatch01.dev.villa.tellme.com 5.8 Generic_108528-17 sun4u
> > sparc SUNW,UltraAX-i2
> >
> > [clayne at sparc-hatch01 ~]$ egrep 'OFFSET_BITS|large files'
> > /usr/include/sys/swap.h #if !defined(_LP64) && _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 64
> > #error "Cannot use swapctl in the large files compilation environment"
> >
> > ----
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Whats cracks me up is that I start working on some obscure section of
> > kdebase in regards to Solaris specifics that has not been touched in
> > months and months and you all of a sudden you feel it necessary to jump
> > on it and point out how my patches are wrong and how I'm "doing it all
> > wrong." and then begin your own work on it - after which you've finished
> > you send an email to kde-core-devel smearing my patch as "bad patch"
> > *without* even CCing me at all.
> >
> > All I know is that I don't like people flat-out misrepresenting me,
> > particularly in cases where they want *their*
> > version/changes/contribution/etc to be used instead.
> >
> > -cl
>
> ___________________________________________________
> This message is from the kde-solaris mailing list.
> Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-solaris.
> Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
> More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
--
Uncle Ed's Rule of Thumb:
Never use your thumb for a rule. You'll either hit it with a
hammmer or get a splinter in it.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-solaris/attachments/20050209/cf049be2/attachment.pgp
More information about the kde-solaris
mailing list