From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 10 08:20:37 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 922441065674 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:20:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.235]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB618FC26 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:20:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id k40so236020rvb.43 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:20:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:date:to:cc :subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=jqJckP7TLkNq99Nd14QXHK8inu5RzYvUwaNxiITtXp4=; b=KmDImaQAjYSLYoEIRutYwHVNSWrGAxF5DK0BK7nwGIqyzDOH9P0m2GwnU43ui1h0Pg EXJFWVRk3G4gmcOTriIbCJYeSgxOf45fT7sk2MdFo4aBicqG0TgyRaLXP5Ot3UwtkkMl A091sDSpSKBh2/CbaSK0rNrkOdWgahUs0umyM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=FGGZhA5HgG70L9S5KcSE67YRf9LAttrcawd7QdBG6jY/aVGzffBY1g6rFeqxIErQT7 9a1t26tTUDGlZCUwuPntJmCbcEpP10Wfx4QbeBxJkO9pg6RSRfBlN0w8IYJHQUbO7wOc VnV3SQiw2vStErWqXqYLhKh4bDYoPfWFsk7zY= Received: by 10.141.98.13 with SMTP id a13mr982007rvm.5.1244622036717; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:20:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from michelle.cdnetworks.co.kr ([114.111.62.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f21sm19082666rvb.55.2009.06.10.01.20.34 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:20:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by michelle.cdnetworks.co.kr (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:22:55 +0900 From: Pyun YongHyeon Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:22:55 +0900 To: Ian FREISLICH Message-ID: <20090610082255.GF63941@michelle.cdnetworks.co.kr> References: <20090609122140.GB59401@michelle.cdnetworks.co.kr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mixed VLAN problems on msk(4) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: pyunyh@gmail.com List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:20:37 -0000 On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 03:27:40PM +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Ian Freislich wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > Debugging some network problems last night, I noticed that I'd get > > > packet loss on a mixed tagged/untagged network every time a tagged > > > VLAN packet arrived, so long as hardware VLAN support was enabled > > > on my NIC. The moment hardware tagging was disabled (manually, or > > > by tcpdump) the packet loss disappeared. > > > > > > My msk(4) hardware: > > > > > > mskc0@pci0:2:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x532111ab chip=0x436211ab rev= > 0x22 hdr=0x00 > > > vendor = 'Marvell Semiconductor (Was: Galileo Technology Ltd)' > > > device = 'Marvell Yukon 88E8053 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller ( > 88E8053)' > > > class = network > > > subclass = ethernet > > > cap 01[48] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D1 D2 D3 current D0 > > > cap 03[50] = VPD > > > cap 05[5c] = MSI supports 2 messages, 64 bit enabled with 2 messages > > > cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 legacy endpoint max data 128(128) link x1(x1 > ) > > > > > > The switch was configured as follows: > > > > > > Port is member in: > > > > > > Vlan Name Egress rule Port Membership Type > > > ---- -------------------------------- ----------- -------------------- > > > 14 14 Untagged Static > > > 26 26 Tagged Static > > > 1000 1000 Tagged Static > > > > > > It appears not to matter whether the vlans are configured with the > > > msk(4) interface as the parent or not. For example, whenever one > > > of these broadcasts is recieved: > > > > > > 12:49:36.093250 IP 41.154.87.2 > 224.0.0.18: VRRPv2, Advertisement, vrid 19 > , prio 0, authtype none, intvl 1s, length 36 > > > 12:49:37.097514 IP 41.154.87.2 > 224.0.0.18: VRRPv2, Advertisement, vrid 19 > , prio 0, authtype none, intvl 1s, length 36 > > > 12:49:38.099525 IP 41.154.87.2 > 224.0.0.18: VRRPv2, Advertisement, vrid 19 > , prio 0, authtype none, intvl 1s, length 36 > > > > > > traffic to the untagged address on vlan14 (basically the address > > > on msk0) is dropped. If I disable vlanhwtag on msk0, the interface > > > suffers no packet loss on reciept of tagged frames. > > > Does that mean msk(4) cannot see untagged frame if VLAN hardware tag stripping is enabled on msk(4)? I don't see suspicious part in code at this moment. Does hardware MAC statistics report something? (sysctl dev.msk.0.stats) Or netstat(1) says Ierrs/Drop on vlan/msk0? I have small patch which corrects bus_dma related bugs but I'm not sure it can fix the VLAN issue. > > > > Would you show me the output of "sysctl hw.busdma"? > > hw.busdma.total_bpages: 512 > hw.busdma.zone0.total_bpages: 512 > hw.busdma.zone0.free_bpages: 512 > hw.busdma.zone0.reserved_bpages: 0 > hw.busdma.zone0.active_bpages: 0 > hw.busdma.zone0.total_bounced: 0 > hw.busdma.zone0.total_deferred: 0 > hw.busdma.zone0.lowaddr: 0xffffffff > hw.busdma.zone0.alignment: 4096 > Thanks for the info.