Re: Looks like the arm 20220805 snapshots are still odd, so probably kern.geom.part.mbr.enforce_chs=0 was still in use
- Reply: Nicolas Caillaud : "Re: Looks like the arm 20220805 snapshots are still odd, so probably kern.geom.part.mbr.enforce_chs=0 was still in use"
- In reply to: Mark Millard : "Re: Looks like the arm 20220805 snapshots are still odd, so probably kern.geom.part.mbr.enforce_chs=0 was still in use"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 00:30:34 UTC
On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 05:16:12PM -0700, Mark Millard wrote: > On 2022-Aug-9, at 11:55, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On 2022-Aug-9, at 11:15, Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 02:06:14PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote: > >>> On Sun, 7 Aug 2022 at 18:43, Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Will do. I’ll commit the suggested change to main tomorrow. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you for your vigilant investigation. > >>> > >>> Shall I commit the enforce_chs check now? > >>> --- > >>> commit 6ee7d69e6b526f35789b23ba570025f1c3b39c1a > >>> Author: Ed Maste <emaste@FreeBSD.org> > >>> Date: Tue Jul 19 16:47:49 2022 -0400 > >>> > >>> release: ensure enforce_chs sysctl is 0 > >>> > >>> We do not want CHS-based alignment for VM or SD card release images. > >>> > >>> Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation > >>> > >>> diff --git a/release/tools/arm.subr b/release/tools/arm.subr > >>> index 6e4ae731a0b9..01c5303cd4e1 100644 > >>> --- a/release/tools/arm.subr > >>> +++ b/release/tools/arm.subr > >>> @@ -62,6 +62,10 @@ umount_loop() { > >>> } > >>> > >>> arm_create_disk() { > >>> + if [ $(sysctl -n kern.geom.part.mbr.enforce_chs) != 0 ]; then > >>> + return 1 > >>> + fi > >>> + > >>> # Create the target raw file and temporary work directory. > >>> chroot ${CHROOTDIR} gpart create -s ${PART_SCHEME} ${mddev} > >>> if [ "${PART_SCHEME}" = "GPT" ]; then > >>> > >> > >> Good question. Do we still want to ensure it is set to '0'? I'm a bit > >> confused from the back-and-forth on the original thread. > >> > >> If we do want to ensure it is set to '0', yes, please go ahead. > >> > > > > Hopefully this week's experiment with explicitly avoiding BSD > > and freebsd-ufs having the same offset inside BSD (avoiding > > both offsets being zero) will allow the UFS labeling to work > > right: freebsd-ufs being tied to a unique offset inside BSD. > > > > I really doubt that using kern.geom.part.mbr.enforce_chs=1 to > > cause the offsets to be different is reasonable, despite that > > it happens to make them distinct: the freebsd-ufs offset is > > better controlled explicitly elsewhere. > > > > The experiment with this week's snapshot is working just fine. > It is based on the update: > > QUOTE > The branch main has been updated by gjb: > > URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=45add40717c24ef0b5418664fae1718b15a0422b > > commit 45add40717c24ef0b5418664fae1718b15a0422b > Author: Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org> > AuthorDate: 2022-08-08 14:59:29 +0000 > Commit: Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org> > CommitDate: 2022-08-08 14:59:29 +0000 > > release: fix alignment for arm SoCs > > MFC after: 3 days > Submitted by: Mark Millard > Sponsored by: Rubicon Communications, LLC ("Netgate") > --- > release/tools/arm.subr | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/release/tools/arm.subr b/release/tools/arm.subr > index 3dea17339958..25d4640cc26b 100644 > --- a/release/tools/arm.subr > +++ b/release/tools/arm.subr > @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ arm_create_disk() { > chroot ${CHROOTDIR} newfs_msdos -L msdosboot -F ${FAT_TYPE} /dev/${mddev}s1 > chroot ${CHROOTDIR} gpart add -t freebsd ${mddev} > chroot ${CHROOTDIR} gpart create -s bsd ${mddev}s2 > - chroot ${CHROOTDIR} gpart add -t freebsd-ufs -a 64k ${mddev}s2 > + chroot ${CHROOTDIR} gpart add -t freebsd-ufs -a 64k -b 64k ${mddev}s2 > chroot ${CHROOTDIR} newfs -U -L rootfs /dev/${mddev}s2a > fi > END QUOTE > > This is unlike when the "-b 64k" was not present. This > includes rebooting after the initial boot, unlike before. > This is for dd'ing to USB3 NVMe SSD media and testing, > for both of: > > FreeBSD-14.0-CURRENT-arm64-aarch64-RPI-20220812-6a70a0c8bfa-257314.img > FreeBSD-13.1-STABLE-arm64-aarch64-RPI-20220812-eb2a9b78586-252107.img > > (The -b use implicitly also changed the size of the freebsd-ufs > slice, making it smaller.) For the media growfs is involved in > the initial boot. > > glabel list now shows ufs/rootfs bound to da0s2a and does not > show a ufs/rootfsa at all. There is no binding to da0s2 (BSD) > shown. > > # glabel list > Geom name: da0s1 > Providers: > 1. Name: msdosfs/MSDOSBOOT > Mediasize: 52428800 (50M) > Sectorsize: 512 > Stripesize: 0 > Stripeoffset: 1048576 > Mode: r1w1e1 > secoffset: 0 > offset: 0 > seclength: 102400 > length: 52428800 > index: 0 > Consumers: > 1. Name: da0s1 > Mediasize: 52428800 (50M) > Sectorsize: 512 > Stripesize: 0 > Stripeoffset: 1048576 > Mode: r1w1e2 > > Geom name: da0s2a > Providers: > 1. Name: ufs/rootfs > Mediasize: 240003866624 (224G) > Sectorsize: 512 > Stripesize: 0 > Stripeoffset: 53542912 > Mode: r1w1e1 > secoffset: 0 > offset: 0 > seclength: 468757552 > length: 240003866624 > index: 0 > Consumers: > 1. Name: da0s2a > Mediasize: 240003866624 (224G) > Sectorsize: 512 > Stripesize: 0 > Stripeoffset: 53542912 > Mode: r1w1e2 > > # gpart show -p > => 63 468862065 da0 MBR (224G) > 63 1985 - free - (993K) > 2048 102400 da0s1 fat32lba [active] (50M) > 104448 468757680 da0s2 freebsd (224G) > > => 0 468757680 da0s2 BSD (224G) > 0 128 - free - (64K) > 128 468757552 da0s2a freebsd-ufs (224G) > > A difference in behavior is that "gpart show" does not > report the ufs/rootfs labeling. For all I know, this > could be expected. glabel does show ufs/rootfs . > > I do not know what would happen if only the size had > been made smaller but the starting offset had been left > at 0. > > But the evidence from the "without -b" and "with -b" > testing is that having starting offset 0 in BSD > and the same size as BSD can be a problem for the > freebsd-ufs slice as processed by the initial boot, > at least when ufs labeling is in use (here ufs/rootfs). > > So far, this week's snapshots look good to me for the > issue having been avoided but ending up better aligned > overall than when kern.geom.part.mbr.enforce_chs=1 was > in use. > > If a larger alignment is needed at some point for > freebsd-ufs, adjusting the pair of gpart add arguments > "-a 64k -b 64k" should deal with it. > > > Notes: > > The USB3 NNVMe SSD based testing was with a 8GiByte > RPi4B and so does have the addition of: > > # > # Local addition that avoids USB3 SSD boot failures that look like: > # uhub_reattach_port: port ? reset failed, error=USB_ERR_TIMEOUT > # uhub_reattach_port: device problem (USB_ERR_TIMEOUT), disabling port ? > initial_turbo=60 > > in the config.txt file that the RPi* firmware uses. > (It is for a separate issue --and FreeBSD does not > have such in place by default at this time.) > Mark, Thank you very much for the detailed information, and of course for reporting the problem, and testing variations of the correct behavior. Glen