From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Sep 18 07:32:36 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70443F51A4 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:32:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mx0.gentlemail.de (mx0.gentlemail.de [IPv6:2a00:e10:2800::a130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46YBX327KJz40HF for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:32:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from mh0.gentlemail.de (mh0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.135]) by mx0.gentlemail.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x8I7WW3g008150 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:32:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@omnilan.de) Received: from titan.inop.mo1.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.de [217.91.127.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mh0.gentlemail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D22E093E for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:32:32 +0200 (CEST) Subject: iflib NICs don't report/recognize link state changes [Was: Re: if_em(4) carrier loss event not recognized with i217; while 82574 does recognize] From: Harry Schmalzbauer To: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" References: <5AF49AAF.9080305@omnilan.de> <5AF5D232.4080808@omnilan.de> <116a509f-e264-0b4d-d2e1-83f44d8c6c1c@omnilan.de> Organization: OmniLAN Message-ID: <0a576bd4-1da4-faf7-beaa-a4d7ebc872ad@omnilan.de> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:32:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <116a509f-e264-0b4d-d2e1-83f44d8c6c1c@omnilan.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Greylist: ACL 136 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (mx0.gentlemail.de [78.138.80.130]); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:32:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: mx0.gentlemail.de; Sender-ip: 78.138.80.135; Sender-helo: mh0.gentlemail.de; ) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46YBX327KJz40HF X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of freebsd@omnilan.de designates 2a00:e10:2800::a130 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=freebsd@omnilan.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.83 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[omnilan.de]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_ALL(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-3.53)[ip: (-9.30), ipnet: 2a00:e10:2800::/38(-4.64), asn: 25074(-3.72), country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25074, ipnet:2a00:e10:2800::/38, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 07:32:36 -0000 Am 18.09.2019 um 08:21 schrieb Harry Schmalzbauer: > Am 11.05.2018 um 19:26 schrieb Harry Schmalzbauer: >>   Bezüglich Harry Schmalzbauer's Nachricht vom 10.05.2018 21:17 >> (localtime): >>>   Hello, >>> >>> if I pull the TP connection from my i217 Clarkville, HEAD still reports >>> media >>> 1000Base-T status "active". >>> >>> Doing the same with the other if_em(4) NIC in that box, a hartwell, >>> 82574LM, the status correctly changes to "no carrier". >>> >>> This is not iflib related, since it's reproducable with FreeBSD >>> 11-stable (some months old). >>> >>> Shall I file a PR? >> Not reproducable anymore with r333469. > > Not sure if that post was correct. > > Please see https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240658 > 12.1-PRERELEASE showes exaclty the same problem with a i211 > (Powerville) MAC, while not reproducable with a i350. Nonsense, sorry. Haven't spent the appropriate attention before… But since this is a major issue for if_lagg(4) users,  I did at least a comperhensive state change test. All if_igb(4) NICs I have available for testing are affecetd, and also if_em(4) with 82574L (Hartwell). Please see the mentioned bug report, where I added all tested NICs. Couldn't remember where I used a i211 (Pearsonville, not Powerville), so this is missing the the latest test. Thanks, -Harry