From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 6 07:27:57 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75231065670; Sun, 6 Dec 2009 07:27:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 174838FC17; Sun, 6 Dec 2009 07:27:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 22so905410eye.9 for ; Sat, 05 Dec 2009 23:27:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AQ61IwqUJsTsnu/VJl0LIppBnCy6L8BmJdXoSo9IfBs=; b=J5oUCW3DNU9aeyPg6jBkWngC81EPrqmXnrPSR89foiF9Iq9aF2ayZzn2Dr5/2jeuJq 91yki/VoxqnC5GvaJu4uBnvBOLlGucwMOTfZYTPENBNIuEPZK77dNztpLwNA3t7D2vhh YF2OXQRq9Fj2v74OHRBksE+fFkQKnVPEZ1DLs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=rsU3h64DHLSqPMhyLfI41cA2mmj8Czy9zev1wYHUda6B2mSUimQZq8IAjJY7ZoofVh wpGn2L5SfrUjO0xe8BsrZprVQjK6MrqCP/hnyzkXevHWHTGXwHUMGiFNUvQdJAu4LTMZ 2hR4jT7eAvLLqlc1YzI3B3us5yuE40hiUfOWc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.85.144 with SMTP id u16mr1813538wee.3.1260084475970; Sat, 05 Dec 2009 23:27:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20091206.142720.79407994.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <20091203.182931.129751456.hrs@allbsd.org> <20091205.184017.30030575.hrs@allbsd.org> <1E3C66EA-A6D3-44D7-B28E-BF068FFF16A6@jnielsen.net> <20091206.142720.79407994.hrs@allbsd.org> Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 23:27:55 -0800 Message-ID: <2a41acea0912052327t7830f85aw5b4b581ab3f09be9@mail.gmail.com> From: Jack Vogel To: Hiroki Sato Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: stable@freebsd.org, john@jnielsen.net Subject: Re: em interface slow down on 8.0R X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2009 07:27:57 -0000 The 82573, when onboard (LOM) is usually special, it is used by system management firmware. Go to the system BIOS and turn off management, see if that eliminates the periodic hang. Jack On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote: > John Nielsen wrote > in <1E3C66EA-A6D3-44D7-B28E-BF068FFF16A6@jnielsen.net>: > > jo> On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:40 AM, Hiroki Sato wrote: > jo> > jo> > Hiroki Sato wrote > jo> > in <20091203.182931.129751456.hrs@allbsd.org>: > jo> > > jo> > hr> And another thing, I noticed a box with 82573E and 82573L > jo> > sometimes > jo> > hr> got stuck after upgrading to 8.0-STABLE. It has moderate > network > jo> > hr> load (average 5-10Mbps) on both NICs. It worked for a day or two > jo> > and > jo> > hr> then got stuck suddenly. Rebooting the box solved the situation, > jo> > but > jo> > hr> it got stuck again after a day or so. After it happens, the > jo> > hr> interface does not respond. The other functionalities of > FreeBSD > jo> > hr> seemed working. Doing an up/down cycle for the NICs seemed to > jo> > send > jo> > hr> some packets, but it did not recover completely; rebooting was > jo> > needed > jo> > hr> for recovery. This box does not have the RTT problem. I am > still > jo> > hr> not sure what is the trigger, there seems something wrong. > jo> > > jo> > Things turned out for this symptom so far are: > jo> > > jo> > - This occurs around once per 1-2 days. > jo> > > jo> > - Once it occurs, all of communications including ARP and IPv4 stop. > jo> > > jo> > - "ifconfig em0 down/up" can recover the interface. However, on doing > jo> > "up" after "down" the following message was displayed: > jo> > > jo> > # ifconfig em0 up > jo> > em0: Could not setup receive structures > jo> > > jo> > After trying it several times it worked. > jo> > > jo> > Then, the interface seemed back to normal for a couple of minutes, > jo> > but it stopped again. > jo> > > jo> > I guess there is a kind of deadlock somewhere but not sure it is > jo> > really related to the em(4) driver. I will continue to investigate > jo> > anyway. > jo> > jo> I'm curious, what speed/duplex is your interface using and is it > jo> statically set or using autoselect? > > No manual configuration. Two em's are set as the following: > > | media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT ) > > It is mainly used for NFS server. The actual communication speed was > around 700Mbps at peak. > > -- Hiroki >