Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 18:14:44 +0800 From: Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa@gmail.com> To: Nick Rogers <ncrogers@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>, "Christopher D. Harrison" <harrison@biostat.wisc.edu> Subject: Re: igb network lockups Message-ID: <CAMOc5cz%2BknVK=skEz1z=WNAjd5mL3DeOVBasHnJ6ggsNtiQdbA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAKOb=YYRu94CRC8Fd1TrWezHig6Od_uNpO2f%2BtCBQTBNQVjtog@mail.gmail.com> References: <512BAA60.3060703@biostat.wisc.edu> <CAFOYbckDFJKRip%2Be=a%2B_JPHhk%2BHbAikRBK0dHEBDDEgdsZT6sw@mail.gmail.com> <512BAF8D.7080308@biostat.wisc.edu> <CAFOYbcnEN=Pzd9k4hvR%2BwqP3_HJj3-QRQSwocfHDSehUH5YPXA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKOb=YYyJZyKzpEBT%2Bo-Vmn7dedRfVW%2BwVh1KVM7oaWT63%2BqBg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKOb=YYRu94CRC8Fd1TrWezHig6Od_uNpO2f%2BtCBQTBNQVjtog@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Nick Rogers <ncrogers@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Nick Rogers <ncrogers@gmail.com> wrote: >> FWIW I have been experiencing a similar issue on a number of systems >> using the em(4) driver under 9.1-RELEASE. This is after upgrading from >> a snapshot of 8.3-STABLE. My systems use PF+ALTQ as well. The symptoms >> are: interface stops passing traffic until the system is rebooted. I >> have not yet been able to gain access to the systems to dig around >> (after they have crashed), however my kernel/network settings are >> properly tuned (high mbuf limit, hw.em.rxd/txd=4096, etc). It seems to >> happen about once a day on systems with around a sustained 50Mb/s of >> traffic. >> >> I realize this is not much to go on but perhaps it helps. I am >> debating trying the e1000 driver in the latest CURRENT on top of >> 9.1-RELEASE. I noticed the Intel shared code was updated about a week >> ago. Would this change or perhaps another change to e1000 since >> 9.1-RELEASE possibly affect stability in a positive way? >> >> Thanks. > > Heres relevant pciconf output: > > em0@pci0:1:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x10d315d9 chip=0x10d38086 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82574L Gigabit Network Connection' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[c8] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 05[d0] = MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit > cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 endpoint max data 128(256) link x1(x1) > cap 11[a0] = MSI-X supports 5 messages in map 0x1c enabled > ecap 0001[100] = AER 1 0 fatal 0 non-fatal 1 corrected For 82574L, i.e. supported by em(4), MSI-X must _not_ be enabled; it is simply broken (you could check 82574 errata on Intel's website to confirm what I have said here). For 82575, i.e. supported by igb(4), MSI-X must _not_ be enabled; it is simply broken (you could check 82575 errata on Intel's website to confirm what I have said here). Best Regards, sephe -- Tomorrow Will Never Die On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Nick Rogers <ncrogers@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Nick Rogers <ncrogers@gmail.com> wrote: >> FWIW I have been experiencing a similar issue on a number of systems >> using the em(4) driver under 9.1-RELEASE. This is after upgrading from >> a snapshot of 8.3-STABLE. My systems use PF+ALTQ as well. The symptoms >> are: interface stops passing traffic until the system is rebooted. I >> have not yet been able to gain access to the systems to dig around >> (after they have crashed), however my kernel/network settings are >> properly tuned (high mbuf limit, hw.em.rxd/txd=4096, etc). It seems to >> happen about once a day on systems with around a sustained 50Mb/s of >> traffic. >> >> I realize this is not much to go on but perhaps it helps. I am >> debating trying the e1000 driver in the latest CURRENT on top of >> 9.1-RELEASE. I noticed the Intel shared code was updated about a week >> ago. Would this change or perhaps another change to e1000 since >> 9.1-RELEASE possibly affect stability in a positive way? >> >> Thanks. > > Heres relevant pciconf output: > > em0@pci0:1:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x10d315d9 chip=0x10d38086 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82574L Gigabit Network Connection' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[c8] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 05[d0] = MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit > cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 endpoint max data 128(256) link x1(x1) > cap 11[a0] = MSI-X supports 5 messages in map 0x1c enabled > ecap 0001[100] = AER 1 0 fatal 0 non-fatal 1 corrected > em1@pci0:2:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x10d315d9 chip=0x10d38086 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82574L Gigabit Network Connection' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[c8] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 05[d0] = MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit > cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 endpoint max data 128(256) link x1(x1) > cap 11[a0] = MSI-X supports 5 messages in map 0x1c enabled > ecap 0001[100] = AER 1 0 fatal 0 non-fatal 1 corrected > em2@pci0:7:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x10d315d9 chip=0x10d38086 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82574L Gigabit Network Connection' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[c8] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 05[d0] = MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit > cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 endpoint max data 128(256) link x1(x1) > cap 11[a0] = MSI-X supports 5 messages in map 0x1c enabled > ecap 0001[100] = AER 1 0 fatal 0 non-fatal 1 corrected > em3@pci0:8:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x10d315d9 chip=0x10d38086 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82574L Gigabit Network Connection' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[c8] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 05[d0] = MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit > cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 endpoint max data 128(256) link x1(x1) > cap 11[a0] = MSI-X supports 5 messages in map 0x1c enabled > ecap 0001[100] = AER 1 0 fatal 0 non-fatal 1 corrected > > >> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Have you done any poking around, looking at stats to determine why the >>> hangs? For instance, >>> might your mbuf pool be depleted? Some other network resource perhaps? >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Christopher D. Harrison < >>> harrison@biostat.wisc.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> Sure, >>>> The problem appears on both systems running with ALTQ and vanilla. >>>> -C >>>> >>>> On 02/25/13 12:29, Jack Vogel wrote: >>>> >>>> I've not heard of this problem, but I think most users do not use ALTQ, >>>> and we (Intel) do not >>>> test using it. Can it be eliminated from the equation? >>>> >>>> Jack >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Christopher D. Harrison < >>>> harrison@biostat.wisc.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I recently have been experiencing network "freezes" and network "lockups" >>>>> on our Freebsd 9.1 systems which are running zfs and nfs file servers. >>>>> I upgraded from 9.0 to 9.1 about 2 months ago and we have been having >>>>> issues with almost bi-monthly. The issue manifests in the system becomes >>>>> unresponsive to any/all nfs clients. The system is not resource bound as >>>>> our I/O is low to disk and our network is usually in the 20mbit/40mbit >>>>> range. We do notice a correlation between temporary i/o spikes and >>>>> network freezes but not enough to send our system in to "lockup" mode for >>>>> the next 5min. Currently we have 4 igb nics in 2 aggr's with 8 queue's >>>>> per nic and our dev.igb reports: >>>>> >>>>> dev.igb.3.%desc: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection version - 2.3.4 >>>>> >>>>> I am almost certain the problem is with the ibg driver as a friend is >>>>> also experiencing the same problem with the same intel igb nic. He has >>>>> addressed the issue by restarting the network using netif on his systems. >>>>> According to my friend, once the network interfaces get cleared, everything >>>>> comes back and starts working as expected. >>>>> >>>>> I have noticed an issue with the igb driver and I was looking for >>>>> thoughts on how to help address this problem. >>>>> >>>>> http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/em-igb-if-transmit-drbr-and-ALTQ-td5760338.html >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts/Ideas are greatly appreciated!!! >>>>> >>>>> -C >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >>>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >>>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Tomorrow Will Never Die
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAMOc5cz%2BknVK=skEz1z=WNAjd5mL3DeOVBasHnJ6ggsNtiQdbA>