[HN Gopher] OpenBSD 7.2
___________________________________________________________________
OpenBSD 7.2
Author : ptidhomme
Score : 303 points
Date : 2022-10-20 13:51 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.openbsd.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.openbsd.org)
| xcdzvyn wrote:
| I wish there was more interest in getting acceptable WiFi and
| Bluetooth performance from any BSD. Even FreeBSD lacks anything
| but a half-baked 802.11n implementation :/
|
| I truly adore BSD; using Linux is a chore comparatively. But I
| don't really have a choice.
| raegis wrote:
| You can use both, to an extent. My most recent example: The
| documentation for GNU troff (groff) in Debian is incomplete--
| the man page for eqn(1) includes the GNU extensions mostly, but
| not the basics. So I downloaded the OpenBSD manpages which
| includes complete documentation for eqn(7).
|
| https://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/amd64/man72.tg...
|
| Good documentation is a killer feature, in my opinion. It's
| nice they provide it all in one tar ball.
| somat wrote:
| I too keep making the mistake of using the openbsd man pages
| for linux projects. Then am confused when things don't work
| as they should.
|
| You would think I would learn better after a few cycles of
| this, but nope, I am rather stupid that way... or perhaps the
| openbsd documentation is just that much better.
| ori_b wrote:
| > Even FreeBSD lacks anything but a half-baked 802.11n
| implementation :/
|
| OpenBSD does better here. AC is supported on Intel cards.
| busterarm wrote:
| You need support from the chip manufacturers to get that done.
|
| Intel and Broadcomm hand you a binary firmware blob and tell
| you to go screw yourself for the most part.
|
| Atheros is one of the few helpful ones. The wifi support that
| we have now is the result of painstaking hard work.
|
| And to be honest, I use the wifi on OpenBSD fine without
| 802.11ac support
| loeg wrote:
| It's partly the driver, partly the stack, at least on
| FreeBSD. My understanding is the newer high-speed wifi modes
| use multiple channels or pairs of channels or something like
| that, and the 80211 stack in FreeBSD was just not built with
| that in mind. So retrofitting it is some work. I think there
| are other things like that missing still, in addition to
| driver support.
| brynet wrote:
| > I use the wifi on OpenBSD fine without 802.11ac support
|
| But OpenBSD does have 802.11ac support*, since 7.1. :-)
|
| * _On iwm(4) /iwx(4) only for now._
|
| https://www.openbsd.org/71.html
| busterarm wrote:
| I'm still on 6.something sorry but that is my hardware. I
| should update. :-)
| snvzz wrote:
| Being one release behind is fine (and supported). 6.x is
| not...
| busterarm wrote:
| I've been moving around a lot for two years and talking
| about unpowered hardware.
| brynet wrote:
| Yes you should, buster.
| ksec wrote:
| >You need support from the chip manufacturers to get that
| done.
|
| Not speaking as an Open Source everything advocate. But I
| wonder how much would it cost to develop a fully open WiFi 7
| and Bluetooth 5.3 Chip.
| somat wrote:
| My understanding[1] is that openbsd has better 802.11 drivers
| than freebsd and reading the lists this is largely due to
| absolutely herculean effort by one person.Stefan Sperling [2]
|
| Dramatic bio(probably none of this is true. but this lives in
| my head after reading the lists). Sperling never wanted to be a
| hero, had no training or experience interfacing with those
| piles of electronic treachery we affectionately call "wifi".
| But he wanted a change, he wanted a difference. He stepped up
| and wrote a patch. Now he is the sole defender between us and
| the vile manufactures actively trying to keep us from our
| starbucks internet connection. Not the hero we deserved, But
| the hero we needed[3].
|
| Apparently finding people willing to work in that arcane
| shithole known as wifi drivers is hard. I looked once and it
| scared the hell out of me. A lovecraftian mess of undocumented
| registers and unknowable machines. 1. I don't
| have a laptop with FreeBSD so this is all hearsay.
| 2. Sperling is also writing got(game of trees) a sane
| implementation of git. http://gameoftrees.org/ 3.
| The theme song for this majestic endeavor.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZsUAqaOiHU
|
| edit: I stated that got was plumbing for git and that is not
| true. that implies got uses git code. it does not, got uses the
| git file format.
| nix23 wrote:
| >But I don't really have a choice.
|
| Jup, wireless is one thing, i run around with a old smartphone
| and tether over usb (on my laptop). But the other one is fan-
| speed, i can even play AAA-Games...for a minute then my GPU
| crashes because of overheating (on the workstation with a AMD-
| Card). No way to adjust fan-speed from the OS is not good.
|
| On both machines FreeBSD
| jscipione wrote:
| Not exactly a BSD but as of June 2022 Haiku has included
| support for 802.11ac on Intel IAX WiFi cards using the OpenBSD
| iwx driver.
|
| https://www.haiku-os.org/blog/waddlesplash/2022-07-09_haiku_...
|
| Edit: iwx not iax
| zxwrt wrote:
| When will openbsd.org get ipv6 support?
| cauterize wrote:
| It has IPv6 support
|
| # uname -a OpenBSD xxx 7.1 GENERIC.MP#3 amd64
|
| # ifconfig em0:
| flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
| lladdr x:x:x:x:x description: xxx index 2 priority 0 llprio 3
| media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT full-duplex) status:
| active inet x.x.x.x netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast x.x.x.x inet6
| fe80::x:x:x%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 inet6 2601:x:x:x::1
| prefixlen 64 pltime 301996 vltime 301996
| arsome wrote:
| I think he meant the website, not the OS.
| zxwrt wrote:
| I meant the website, yeah
| cauterize wrote:
| Oops :) I was so excited for the release I forgot how to
| read!
| zxwrt wrote:
| No worries
| cauterize wrote:
| The SMP improvements look interesting. Anyone know of performance
| results from 7.1 to 7.2?
| miller_joe wrote:
| i am also wondering about this and happen to be in the middle
| of testing some L2 tunneling (etherip mostly, might also test
| vxlan or egre) with ipsec and wireguard in a set of VM's on
| virtualbox.
|
| the SMP improvements in the networking stack caught my eye and
| i am in the process of trying to upgrade these vm's and re-test
| (iperf3). if i find anything interesting i'll report back
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Yes, I am most excited about SMP improvements with networking
| too. I run OBSD on all my edge devices so this could make
| life a lot cheaper.
|
| I've been a huge fan since v4.7 and I'm glad to see the
| constant improvements.
| nazgulsenpai wrote:
| > Fixed luna88k MULTIPROCESSOR kernels booting with CPU modules
| installed in arbitrary slots.
|
| An OS release capable of running on the latest hardware in 2022
| is still making optimizations for a niche system from the late
| 80s/early 90s. There's something very beautiful about that.
| r12343a_19 wrote:
| Yet, they dropped support for i386DX and some older (386)
| Cyrix?
| johnklos wrote:
| The toolchains dropped support for the i80386, not the OSes
| directly.
|
| Intel, as they're known for doing, half-assed many things.
| Even though the 32 bit mode on the i80386 wouldn't be
| compatible with i8086 real mode and they could've made vast
| improvements, they decided to make just a mediocre 32 bit
| CPU, since they figured most people would just be running it
| as a super fast i8086.
|
| The m68020 in 1984, by comparison, was much more forward
| thinking. It had atomic operations, could exist in a multi-
| processor environment much more easily than an i80386, and it
| can still run a modern OS (NetBSD) in 2022.
| tedunangst wrote:
| None of this actually relevant to openbsd dropping 386
| support 15 years ago.
| sidkshatriya wrote:
| > None of this actually relevant to openbsd dropping 386
| support 15 years ago.
|
| Well, I think the argument being made (implicitly) was:
|
| If Intel _had_ made a decent and capable implementation
| of 386 with forward looking CPU instructions etc. 386
| _could_ have been alive and kicking today in many more
| operating systems and platforms.
| tedunangst wrote:
| It's more like the PC platform has continued to evolve in
| many ways, and 30 year old museum pieces aren't
| particularly interesting. Contrast with the mac68k
| platform, which is frozen in time. You don't see anybody
| trying to build one kernel that boots on every Mac ever
| made because the CPU has changed several times, but it
| wouldn't be pleasant even with continuity.
| pseudostem wrote:
| IIRC, the argument from the developers on OpenBSD misc
| mailing lists is that developing on 30 year museum pieces
| gives them perspective on the difference between right
| and wrong. It exposes them to more "stuff" than if it
| were the other way around.
| tedunangst wrote:
| A finite number of such museum pieces are necessary, and
| a 386 from 1992 provides little insight.
| tremon wrote:
| IIRC, the 386 did not have atomic load/store operations
| (XADD, CMPXCHG), so it's much harder to write reliable
| semaphores/mutexes on that platform. I'm surprised OpenBSD
| supported it for this long.
|
| (edit: it seems they didn't: _OpenBSD /i386 hasn't actually
| supported running on [386sx/386dx] for some time._ )
| xxpor wrote:
| Is there an SMP version of the 386?
|
| You may need locks on a non-SMP system (since you can still
| have concurrency), but without parallelism you don't need
| atomics... right?
| tremon wrote:
| The 386 still has hardware and software interrupts which
| might just happen between the load and store
| instructions, so it's not as simple as "we don't need
| atomics".
|
| If you were writing code specifically for the 386, I
| suppose you could implement all semaphores as critical
| sections to guard against external interrupts; I see no
| reason why that wouldn't work. But realistically, that
| code would be more of a museum piece than something you'd
| want to maintain in a 2022 operating system.
| xxpor wrote:
| Ah interrupts, of course.
|
| /me goes back to his polling-only application :)
|
| (we have an interrupt, but it's "the watchdog fired and
| you're about to die anyway", so not exactly complex to
| handle...)
| my123 wrote:
| https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20190404-00/?p
| =10...
| xxpor wrote:
| of COURSE there's a Raymond Chen blog post about this :D
| tinglymintyfrsh wrote:
| I'm trying to remember from the last em64t/ia32e & ia32 ISA
| toy OS I messed around with.
|
| i386 ISA is the bare minimum for functioning protected mode
| to be better than real-mode DOS. i286 protected mode is
| absolute trash.
|
| i386 is so bad at dealing with SMP primitives, it was
| standard practice to have a non-SMP kernel. Then, you get
| into the business of maintaining 2 kernel flavors or a
| major kernel feature flag.
|
| For those interested, there is a quirky processor mode
| trick called "unreal mode" that allows flat addressing
| without switching to protected mode (no protections, just
| like real-mode DOS).
| jrumbut wrote:
| I searched for this luna88k and was taken to a Wikipedia page
| that I read until I realized it was for a computer called LUNA
| but it had a 68k processor.
|
| The reason it came up was a tiny quote from the NetBSD
| announcement of Luna 68k support which mentions its "rare
| cousin" the 88k LUNA.
|
| Now that's niche!
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Also a good example of what I understand the OpenBSD
| development goals to be: developers work on the features and
| hardware support that interest them. It isn't a popularity
| contest; targeting the most popular platforms or growing the
| number of users of OpenBSD is not a project goal.
|
| So as long as there are developers who want to do the work to
| support the 88k LUNA (whatever it is) then it will happen.
|
| More specifically:
|
| https://www.openbsd.org/goals.html
| reaperducer wrote:
| I thought I knew a lot about 68k processors, but "88k" is new
| to me. It turns out to be the Motorola 881001, which was used
| in Unisys servers running Unix.
|
| 1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_88100
| cafard wrote:
| Data General built a machine called the Aviion with the
| 88K.
| kalleboo wrote:
| I only know about the 88k since Apple prototyped using it
| for their first RISC Mac back in the day before pushing for
| the PowerPC alliance
| lukeh wrote:
| NeXT as well I believe!
| jkepler wrote:
| M'y physics prof loved his NeXT machine back in the day.
| johndoe0815 wrote:
| Motorola had a lot of VME bus boards with 88100/88110 CPUs.
| There's still a web site dedicated to the 88k CPUs at
| http://www.m88k.com
|
| Fun fact - the 88k was designed by Mitch Alsup, who also
| designed SPARC CPUs for Ross, x86s for AMD and others. He
| is retired, but still active in the comp.arch Usenet
| newsgroup.
| badsectoracula wrote:
| This is something i always felt was lost with what seems to be
| "commercialization of free software" - software doing things
| because it was technically possible regardless if that made
| commercial sense. Nowadays it seems most projects have
| commercial interests (or even if they don't they act like it)
| and processes that come against that, often ending up
| abandoning things because of usage metrics and agendas, as if
| they have some board of directors to please.
| amatecha wrote:
| Yeah it's one of the many reasons I use OpenBSD - I can
| actually use my old, perfectly-functional hardware from
| literally decades ago and still run the latest software with
| latest security features and frequent updates. On numerous
| architectures, too!
| BirAdam wrote:
| The BSDs are awesome. I have been considering moving to BSD from
| Slackware Linux on my PC at home, but haven't yet pulled the
| trigger. Mostly, I cannot decide which to use among NetBSD,
| OpenBSD, or NetBSD.
| user3939382 wrote:
| NetBSD is known for its package system pkgsrc and they have a
| nifty new firewall https://man.netbsd.org/npf.7
|
| It's most known for its portability and the number of
| architectures it supports, which many interpret as a comment on
| the quality of its underlying architecture.
|
| SDF runs on it so you can play with it there.
|
| OpenBSD is known for its security but I've run into too many
| rude people in their community which has never happened to me
| with NetBSD, maybe just a coincidence.
|
| FreeBSD is known for its performance and being more up to date
| with drivers, etc but feels more "messy" and therefore less
| BSDish to me.
|
| Take all of this with a grain of salt, just one man's take.
| nequo wrote:
| > NetBSD, OpenBSD, or NetBSD.
|
| Have to go with NetBSD there. :)
|
| More seriously, you could give them test rides inside QEMU
| before you decide.
| matrix12 wrote:
| Qemu will let you see what works on the OS as far as software
| goes. But fails to tell if your hardware is even supported.
| They all have usb images available. Boot up, see if it finds
| everything, combined with your Software needs. I run all
| three so it's not always a trinary value.
| [deleted]
| seabird wrote:
| FreeBSD is focused on the same market Linux is. It will
| probably give you the least trouble in terms of software and
| hardware compatibility.
|
| OpenBSD is "the way things should be" according to a certain
| group of people. Generally feels good if you're tired of the
| Linux Mexican design standoff, but will sometimes leave you
| either very happy or very confused depending on whether or not
| you're on the same page as the developers.
|
| I haven't used NetBSD extensively myself, but it seems to be a
| pretty simple system with a focus on portability.
|
| None of the above matters if what you want to use doesn't work
| on your hardware. Test each one.
| nix23 wrote:
| Try FreeBSD first, more functions more ports/pkg, i had OBSD
| for a long time, but decided against it because of ZFS and
| Wine-Proton....and much more, but it's really about what you
| want and what you need.
| newZWhoDis wrote:
| Can you elaborate? As an outsider I don't know if you mean
| FreeBSD has ZFS or OBSD
| xcdzvyn wrote:
| FreeBSD has very good ZFS support; and more software
| support in general (as OP alluded to with Wine-Proton)
| irusensei wrote:
| Stopped using FreeBSD on my home servers (2 RockPro64s)
| because it lacks big.Little support, which results in an OS
| that doesn't distinct between the stronger and weaker cores.
| Among the BSDs only NetBSD supports it but that's too far
| from my comfort zone. Not only that but SSL and GNUTLS speeds
| were terrible at the time since it didn't knew how to use the
| cpu extensions (greatly impacts samba performance) I've
| stoped using.
|
| Meanwhile Linux is a breeze. Faster, more responsible pulling
| 650MB/s on AES cryptsetup benchmark. BTRFS is actually quite
| good and LXC replaces jails. Transfers can easily saturate my
| gigabit connection. Don't think I'm going back so soon.
| nix23 wrote:
| Yeah sorry i don't like the idea of weaker stronger cores,
| i think it's one of the most stupidest ideas.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| It totally depends on what you want to do/how you want to use
| your PC. For a 'general use' PC I'd suggest FreeBSD. There
| are more ports for newer programs that will offer more
| choices. NetBSD and OpenBSD also have their strengths, and
| EACH ONE can be used as a daily-driver. It just depends what
| you need/use.
|
| IMHO:
|
| FreeBSD = general purpose
|
| (Open|Net)BSD = more specialized
| nix23 wrote:
| Well that's what i wrote no?
|
| > but it's really about what you want and what you need.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Yes, I just the wrong reply link.
|
| So I'm agreeing with you!
| knaekhoved wrote:
| I like to use FreeBSD for general appliances, OpenBSD for
| security-hardened appliances.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Agreed, same.
| anthk wrote:
| GL 2.1 support for my crappy Intel iGPU thanks to Gallium,
| instead of 1.4x. Good news. No modern gaming, but at least
| retrogaming and games like Trigger Rally will run fast. And,
| maybe, PSP emulation on an n270 Atom, but just as an experiment.
| boundchecked wrote:
| >Direct Rendering Manager and graphics drivers
|
| >Updated drm(4) to Linux 5.15.69
|
| >inteldrm(4): support for Alder Lake, Raptor Lake
|
| I have fond memory of booting OpenBSD the first time last year on
| an AMD RDNA GPU, after installation a simple "fw_update" got me a
| hardware accelerated graphic environment going. Very impressive
| in my book.
| mustermannBB wrote:
| I like OpenBSD, but its very limited virtualization options means
| I cannot really use it full-time. Also the performance is not
| that great, but something I could live with.
| dfc wrote:
| What's the story behind: one diff two
| OKs commit blowfish
| kwooding wrote:
| Dr Seuss:
|
| One fish Two fish Red fish Blue fish.
| qbrass wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Fish,_Two_Fish,_Red_Fish,_...
|
| plus
|
| https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/lib/libc/crypt...
| oktwtf wrote:
| OpenBSD is my happy place.
|
| Install the OS, grab the src, subscribe to the lists and get to
| hacking!
|
| The IRC and Matrix chats are great spots to get the low down,
| communities are helpful and documented.
| nagyf wrote:
| How do you get into this sort of stuff? "grab the src,
| subscribe to the lists and get to hacking!" is good but as a
| newbie, I would definitely need more guidance :D
|
| Are there any good resources?
| jmclnx wrote:
| Good ? :)
|
| OpenBSD has the best docs and really all you need to get up
| and going. Granted you may need to read some docs a few
| times, but it is all there. I got going with OpenBSD just by
| reading.
|
| The FAQ is your friend
|
| https://www.openbsd.org/faq/
| jkepler wrote:
| Does OpenBSD have any kind of cryptographically measured boot
| like Heads (which I believe can only boot to GNU/Linux)?
| jmclnx wrote:
| upgrade time, yea!!
|
| Congrads to OpenBSD on a stable OS and how they plan their
| releases
| Panino wrote:
| Just finished upgrading. Thank you OpenBSD!
|
| > Added support for Apple M2
|
| > Added support for Lenovo ThinkPad x13s and other machines using
| the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 (SC8280XP) SoC.
|
| Given the current status and trajectory of ARM64 in phones and
| tablets, in SBCs, laptops, and even some servers, coupled with
| the deeply-held global interest in reducing energy usage, every
| year I get more confident in the belief that AMD64 has peaked and
| ARM64 is the upcoming top platform. I'm not sure if I'll ever buy
| another x86 machine for myself.
| pimeys wrote:
| I was just reading the new ThinkPad Z13 with the latest Ryzen
| is faster and gets similar battery life than the M1 or M2, so I
| wouldn't call x86 dead yet.
|
| https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-ThinkPad-Z13-laptop-rev...
|
| And you do not need to switch the CPU arch.
| wslh wrote:
| Incredible, seems like AMD is having an edge over the battery
| life wars. Is Intel having an answer for that?
| HNDV wrote:
| >with the latest Ryzen is faster and gets similar battery
| life than the M1 or M2, so I wouldn't call x86 dead yet.
|
| Mind you, even "as fast as M1" would look amazing compared to
| Qualcomm's mediocre chips. Those who talk of ARM superiority
| forgot that if you don't buy an Apple device, what you get is
| mediocrity. And that's just talking of CPU performance. If
| you need a real GPU, those qualcomm SOC drop from "bearable"
| to "absolute garbage". While the M1 and M2 have GPUs that are
| comparable to some of NVIDIA's mid range offerings.
|
| ARM based windows PCs aren't really going to supplant x86 as
| long as Qualcomm doesn't put a real effort.
|
| Qualcomm is also one of the manufacturers that makes it
| impossible for Android to be supported for as long as iOS.
| Closed drivers + no will to do long term support because
| they're happy to sell more e-waste = drivers won't work on
| newer linux kernels and what remains is a brick.
| shepherdjerred wrote:
| I'm _so_ excited about arm64. Regardless of your opinion of
| Apple, you have to appreciate that they 've really pushed the
| consumer world forward with their switch to arm processors in
| laptops.
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| TIL that there were ARM64 windows laptops.
| Cyberdog wrote:
| Microsoft sold ARM-powered versions of the Surface for a
| while (not sure if it was ARM64 at that point) and releases a
| version of Windows which runs on the Pi, so it's something
| they've showed interest in for a while. I'm guessing that
| they also see the writing on the wall in terms of ascendancy
| of the ARM platform and want to make sure they have software
| to sell which runs on it as it happens, but hardware vendors
| haven't been falling over themselves to bring ARM Windows
| devices to market just yet.
| yabones wrote:
| Really neat to see growing ARM processor support! Always
| impressed by the quality of OpenBSD releases.
| yakubin wrote:
| Is Absolute OpenBSD (the book) still a good intro to this system?
| ixtenu wrote:
| I found it helpful. Just be aware that portions of it are
| outdated, as summarized by this comment:
|
| https://old.reddit.com/r/openbsd/comments/q8lsiq/how_relevan...
| nix23 wrote:
| Yes Absolutely ;)
| ViceCitySage wrote:
| Been very interested in OpenBSD for a while. Planning on
| installing it onto PCEngines' APU + antenna and using it as a
| router. Following this guide: https://openbsdrouterguide.net/ .
| joshhowes wrote:
| That page has some outdated information. There's an official
| guide on OpenBSD's own website:
| https://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/example1.html - No need to rely
| on third party blogs with BSD most of the time. Official docs
| and man pages are always better and up to date.
|
| (I wish this was true for Linux too...)
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| I use OBSD exclusively on my gateway devices. Currently using
| it at home on an HP730 with a quad-port GB Intel NIC. Total
| cost ~$200 (used)
|
| Keep you eyes open for sales. /r/homelabsales/ has great deals
| on these SFF devices sometimes.
|
| I've read that the PCEngines struggles to keep up with network
| traffic in excess of 100Mb/s.
|
| Although this update may have addressed that. That router guide
| is ok. but the official pages are better.
| https://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/example1.html
|
| Hit me up directly if you have any questions.
| o2kewl[at]gmail[dot]com
| efortis wrote:
| My apu handles 300Mb/s with a dozen firewall rules without
| issues.
|
| I haven't tested it on a 1Gb/s but @c17r said it works:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25045963
|
| I have an older alix one, and I think it worked with 100Mb/s,
| but struggled after that.
|
| Now, I bought my apu in 2016 and I don't regret it, but I'm
| not sure I'd buy one in 2022.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Ok, my mistake.
| evh wrote:
| > I've read that the PCEngines struggles to keep up with
| network traffic in excess of 100Mb/s.
|
| For reference, quick iperf3 TCP tests on my APU2 (cpu[0123]:
| AMD GX-412TC SOC, 998.27 MHz; em[0123] at pci[1234] dev 0
| function 0 "Intel I211" rev 0x03):
|
| LAN host <-> APU: ~410 Mbps
|
| LAN host <-> APU (over WireGuard): ~140 Mbps
|
| However, I've put em[123] together as a veb(4) switch
| _without pf involvement_ and two LAN hosts will get almost
| the full gigabit between them over that. Would need something
| bigger if I had a faster uplink or more complex LAN
| requirements.
| ViceCitySage wrote:
| Thanks for the heads up and resources.
| JAlexoid wrote:
| What's HP 730? Google tells me it's an ink cartridge....
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Ack, sorry.
|
| It's an: HP t730 Thin Client
|
| From dmesg:
|
| cpu0: AMD RX-427BB with AMD Radeon(tm) R7 Graphics, 2697.05
| MHz, 15-30-01
|
| 4-cores total
| JAlexoid wrote:
| It would have been something amazing, if you actually ran
| it on that ink cartridge(there's some mcu in there, to my
| knowledge)
| hedora wrote:
| There are specific guides for the APU2, down to lists of parts
| to order to get openbsd running (including the serial to usb
| dongle, for instance).
|
| I set mine up years ago, so won't link to the old guide I used.
| technofiend wrote:
| Serve the home [1] regularly reviews all sorts of low end small
| form factor hardware and aliexpress hardware. You'd probably be
| better served (heh) by scanning their website before investing
| in hardware. You can get an aliexpress device with much more
| horsepower and higher speed ports. If your budget is $200 then
| fine, but if you find out later doubling your budget gets a box
| that sustains 1 gigabit speeds or $600 gets you a machine that
| sustains 2.5gbe speeds and your $200 was wasted, it would be
| great for you to discover that now.
|
| [1] https://www.servethehome.com/
| miller_joe wrote:
| greetings fellow traveler. I am also a big fan of openbsd for
| home router/firewall. Been running it since the early 2000s.
|
| I've gone through a lot of hardware in that time. From an old
| dec alpha (kernel panic'd often) to only x86 these days.
|
| In recent years I've started to use these low-cost, fanless,
| intel machines from aliexpress. They're usually pretty great.
| Recently I upgraded (ServeTheHome's reviews were very
| helpful!) from a box I got in 2018 from aliepxress that had
| 6x 1gbe ports to a newer box with 2.5gbe since my fiber ISP
| has 10gbe ports right now (and there are no cheap, fanless,
| low-power intel boxes with 10gig nic's). Specifically a
| Celeron N5105 (N6005 was not available earlier this year, so
| I canceled and ordered N5105) with 4x 2.5gbe nic's, this
| one[1] from Topton, though I believe other vendors on
| aliexpress are all selling basically the same thing.
|
| The unit works pretty well, however, I noticed with OpenBSD
| 7.0 and 7.1 that one CPU core was constantly pegged at 100%
| servicing interrupts. Running `top -S` showed the acpi kernel
| thread was the culprit, and `systat` showed `acpi0` as the
| source of interrupts. The box worked fine and could route
| (with NAT and filtering) the full 2.5gbps internet connection
| fine, but it would run hotter and probably use more
| electricity than needed.
|
| I enabled ACPI_DEBUG which did not make for a usable box at
| all due to the amount of debug prints being generated but it
| was enough to verify the interrupt spam coming from the ACPI
| GFE _L6F handler. A google search shows this is not
| particularly uncommon and is due to buggy motherboard
| firmware. Both Linux and FreeBSD have a way to disable
| interrupts on a live system. OpenBSD does not however. And
| FWIW, I booted an opnsense live CD based on FreeBSD and this
| interrupt storm was not happening. So I assume FreeBSD may
| have seen this particular bug or just happens to handle it
| already. This box should be fine with any of the FreeBSD
| based OS's. Which is often bundled on these firewalls you buy
| from aliexpress.
|
| The usual fix for these interrupt storms from buggy BIOS's is
| an eventual fix from the vendor. In this case though I don't
| expect to ever seen a BIOS update for this box, and there
| really is not a website to go download one from anyway. The
| vendor on aliexpress assured me that if they ever release a
| new BIOS that they would tell me. I doubt this will ever
| happen.
|
| In any case, I have "solved" the issue finally with a small
| kernel patch I found on the excellent openbsd mailing lists.
| The issue in that case was different, older hardware, but the
| symptoms were the same.
|
| Long story short I am posting all of this here so that if
| someone else runs across this same issue they will be able to
| resolve it much faster than I was.
|
| Patch for OpenBSD 7.1 kernel to ignore the L6F GFE interrupt
| storms: https://gist.github.com/joemiller/9f5698c5634d4a93d10
| 1985dc5...
|
| [1] https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256803807107706.html
| technofiend wrote:
| Did that increase your overall throughput? Drag racing
| pfsense vs OpenBSD on a xeon vmware system shows much less
| throughput on the OpenBSD system. I'm totally willing to
| pay the overhead for a more secure system, but I do still
| have certain performance goals.
| vladak wrote:
| Another piece of advice I received from an OpenBSD
| contributor is to lurk on the mailing lists and see what the
| OpenBSD developers (esp. those that hack on networking code)
| actually use themselves and get that if you care about
| stability and performance.
| wahern wrote:
| > what the OpenBSD developers actually use themselves
|
| That's one reason PCEngines is so popular, even though
| PCEngines themselves seem mostly preoccupied with Linux and
| FreeBSD.
| MisterTea wrote:
| You managed to buy an APU2 or is this existing? They are pretty
| much uobtanium as of now.
|
| I ran OpenBSD on my now deceased APU2. Never had any issues as
| it was solid up until it died, likely from lazily leaving it in
| a room which routinely reaches >90 F / 32 C in the summer. When
| the stars align and they release the SFP version, I'm going to
| grab one.
| napkin wrote:
| It exists? I got mine from Teklager, shipped internationally.
| Unfortunately the SFP didn't work with my ISP's fibre module
| (it would flap). I believe this is a Linux thing though.
| Otherwise quite happy with it.
|
| https://teklager.se/en/products/router-components/pc-
| engines...
| aliqot wrote:
| Anybody running this on m1/m2 yet? Any issues?
| matrix12 wrote:
| Yeap, works great on the m1 macbook air. Everything works. The
| only thing missing is support for /dev/csam :(
| jiripospisil wrote:
| GPU acceleration?
| brynet wrote:
| No, unaccelerated framebuffer for now. X works though.
| aliqot wrote:
| Is that the secure key enclave thing?
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-20 23:01 UTC)