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: Glen Barber : "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 ]
From: Nicolas Caillaud <nicolas_at_lautrecote.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 06:04:41 UTC
hi all

sorry to "troll", but how can I subscribe to this list ?

thank you very much

Le 13/08/2022 à 02:30, Glen Barber a écrit :
> 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
>