From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Nov 15 07:41:50 2020 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 27A3B2D5E63 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CYkg20S23z3G53 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 0F70E2D604E; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:50 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 0F37F2D6305 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CYkg170sXz3FZ2 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3E3118824 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AF7fnTU054449 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:49 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AF7fnpU054448 for net@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:49 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251047] Multicast: Not possible to add MFC entry's when MAXVIFS = 64 Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:50 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: Unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, needs-patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: louis.freebsd@xs4all.nl X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 07:41:50 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251047 --- Comment #2 from Louis --- Thanks for your reaction, which made me realize that I had to do more than = one change, to get a changed maxvifs working. I think I managed that. Not in the proper way yet, and surely not the way it IMHO should work. Problem is that the actual package has to be recompiled for every machine having a different number of vifs. And you need to know the number of vifs = of the (unkown) target machine at compile time.=20 And that where ...... IMHO the package should be machine independent ! So what I would like to archive is: - start the program - do an OS-call to read/obtain the maxvifs number - open structures based on the obtained maxvifs - start the actions where the program is designed for Do not know if this is possible, but compiling the package maxvif number / os-instance depended .....is bad !! So you would help me with an OS-call/method providing the maxvifs number on= the actual OS-instance ..... Of course this is just a question. As far as I can see now, the problem is = not in the os. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Nov 15 16:11:39 2020 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 631C92ECC2D for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CYxzH2B27z4X0r for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 4AE202ECACA; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 4AAE42ECD62 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CYxzH1d4pz4X0q for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ADFF1E9B4 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AFGBdUd002541 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AFGBde0002540 for net@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 249399] The last jail created using VNET has ARP problem Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: fred.ha11@yahoo.com X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: Unable to Reproduce X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status resolution Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:11:39 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D249399 fred.ha11@yahoo.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Open |Closed Resolution|--- |Unable to Reproduce --- Comment #5 from fred.ha11@yahoo.com --- With 12.2-RELEASE I can not longer consistently duplicate the problem. While there are still VNET / ARP problems, I not longer believe that this bug rep= ort will be helpful in diagnosing the problem. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Nov 15 21:00:51 2020 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 66D78469785 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZ4Nz1ndNz3jDk for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 13A8E469782; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 07C8A4694AB for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CZ4Ny5Vpyz3jNn for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7ABD522149 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AFL0oLQ038411 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:50 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from bugzilla@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AFL0ouR038410 for net@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:50 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <202011152100.0AFL0ouR038410@kenobi.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: bugzilla set sender to bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Problem reports for net@FreeBSD.org that need special attention Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:50 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:00:51 -0000 To view an individual PR, use: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users, which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. Status | Bug Id | Description ------------+-----------+--------------------------------------------------- In Progress | 221146 | [ixgbe] Problem with second laggport In Progress | 235700 | oce(4) driver causes fatal trap 12 on boot with e New | 204438 | setsockopt() handling of kern.ipc.maxsockbuf limi New | 213410 | [carp] service netif restart causes hang only whe Open | 7556 | ppp: sl_compress_init() will fail if called anyth Open | 166724 | if_re(4): watchdog timeout Open | 187835 | ngctl(8) strange behavior when adding more than 5 Open | 193452 | Dell PowerEdge 210 II -- Kernel panic bce (broadc Open | 194453 | dummynet(4): pipe config bw parameter limited to Open | 200319 | Bridge+CARP crashes/freezes Open | 202510 | [CARP] advertisements sourced from CARP IP cause Open | 207261 | netmap: Doesn't do TX sync with kqueue Open | 217978 | dhclient: Support supersede statement for option Open | 220468 | libfetch: Does not handle 407 (proxy auth) when c Open | 222273 | igb(4): Kernel panic (fatal trap 12) due to netwo Open | 225438 | panic in6_unlink_ifa() due to race Open | 227720 | Kernel panic in ppp server Open | 230807 | if_alc(4): Driver not working for Killer Networki Open | 235524 | igb(4): Ethernet interface loses active link stat Open | 236888 | ppp daemon: Allow MTU to be overridden for PPPoE Open | 237072 | netgraph(4): performance issue [on HardenedBSD]? Open | 237840 | Removed dummynet dependency on ipfw Open | 238324 | Add XG-C100C/AQtion AQC107 10GbE NIC driver Open | 240530 | netgraph/ng_source: Allow ng_source to inject int Open | 240944 | em(4): Crash with Intel 82571EB NIC with AMD Pile Open | 240969 | netinet6: Neighbour reachability detection broken Open | 241106 | tun/ppp: panic: vm_fault: fault on nofault entry Open | 241162 | Panic in closefp() triggered by nginx (uwsgi with Open | 243463 | ix0: Watchdog timeout Open | 244066 | divert: Add sysctls for divert socket send and re Open | 244706 | panic: NULL dereference inside __mtx_lock_sleep() Open | 118111 | rc: network.subr Add MAC address based interface 32 problems total for which you should take action. From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Nov 15 21:18:23 2020 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 2D50246A2E4 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZ4nC0cR7z3kK2 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 14F7746A2E3; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:23 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 14C4346A423 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CZ4nC028lz3kK1 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E833622A87 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AFLIMtg046820 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:22 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AFLIMUM046819 for net@FreeBSD.org; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:22 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251154] mlx4en sometimes panics on ACPI S3 suspend/resume Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:22 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: panic X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to keywords Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:18:23 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251154 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|bugs@FreeBSD.org |net@FreeBSD.org Keywords| |panic --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Nov 16 11:08:00 2020 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 B63EB2EB83E for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:08:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZRBS3VGxz3DDG for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 58F5F2EB92B; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 519072EB83D for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CZRBP71TCz3D7H for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4D444CB7 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AGB7vBn004016 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:57 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AGB7vZT004014 for net@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:57 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251047] Multicast: Not possible to add MFC entry's when MAXVIFS = 64 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:07:57 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: Unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, needs-patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: ae@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 11:08:00 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251047 --- Comment #3 from Andrey V. Elsukov --- (In reply to Louis from comment #2) It seems there is no easy way, but the kernel has sysctl variable that depe= nds from MAXVIFS: # sysctl -o net.inet.ip.viftable net.inet.ip.viftable: Format:S,vif[MAXVIFS] Length:1792 Dump:0x00d068f601f8ffff0000000000000000... The size of struct vif is known, so you can determine MAXVIFS. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Nov 16 12:54:17 2020 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 B79FB2EEC8F for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZTY54ddCz3MQL for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 9D0652EED16; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 9B9B72EEB37 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CZTY53jlTz3MN0 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 728FE639E for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AGCsHaD056892 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AGCsHAX056891 for net@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251047] Multicast: Not possible to add MFC entry's when MAXVIFS = 64 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: Unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, needs-patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: louis.freebsd@xs4all.nl X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:54:17 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251047 --- Comment #4 from Louis --- Thanks, It does not win the beauty price, but it could work. Stupid, that there is not proper call for that, Louis --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Nov 16 17:24:31 2020 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 E7CFD46C302 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZbXv4rpwz3sbX for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id A66FF46C20F; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 A639E46C18F for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CZbXv44yVz3t12 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F21F11AC7 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AGHOV08088180 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AGHOVAP088179 for net@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:31 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 250870] vnet jail with samba can take down my node Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:30 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: misc X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: sharky@schaack.io X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:24:32 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D250870 --- Comment #2 from Sebastian S --- thank you ! --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Nov 17 02:35:56 2020 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 A94C447BF79 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:35:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jtmj666999@vip.sohu.com) Received: from smtp123-58.mail.sohu.com (smtp123-58.mail.sohu.com [123.125.123.58]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZqn5591sz3FyJ for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:35:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jtmj666999@vip.sohu.com) Received: from [192.168.16.83] (unknown [61.184.46.119]) by smtp123-58.mail.sohu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4CZqmq160fz1xtW for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:35:38 +0800 (CST) From: jtmj666999 Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:31:33 +0800 Subject: What do you know about tungsten-cobalt cemented carbide? Message-Id: <6O47LETP7CU4.FWQL9YQR0SMY1@PC-91230JCSLB> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Sohu-Gateway: 1 X-Sohu-Antispam-Language: 0 X-Sohu-Antispam-Score: 0.01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CZqn5591sz3FyJ X-Spamd-Bar: - X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.89 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[123.125.123.58:from]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:123.125.123.0/24:c]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[123.125.123.58:from:127.0.2.255]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.987]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[sohu.com,reject]; MIME_HTML_ONLY(0.20)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:~]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; ASN(0.00)[asn:4808, ipnet:123.125.64.0/18, country:CN]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:35:56 -0000 From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Nov 17 02:44:32 2020 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 D90EC47C71B for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CZqz45bdvz3GYQ for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id C01EE47C6CD; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 BFEA147C6CC for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CZqz450lcz3GVt for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F35418E8C for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AH2iWTu065221 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AH2iWbA065220 for net@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251047] Multicast: Not possible to add MFC entry's when MAXVIFS = 64 Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: Unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, needs-qa X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: koobs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status keywords flagtypes.name Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:44:32 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251047 Kubilay Kocak changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|New |Open Keywords|needs-patch |needs-qa Flags|maintainer-feedback? | --- Comment #5 from Kubilay Kocak --- Is there a suitable enhancement proposal that can be made here? Also, is this issue limited or scoped only to Intel network hardware? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Nov 17 17:51:29 2020 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 78F9946AB04 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CbD5Y2qjNz3D7r for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 611A346A8B6; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 60E1D46A95A for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbD5Y2FlXz3DTd for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4089E23ED3 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AHHpTl9070065 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AHHpTuv070064 for net@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251208] bridge(4) combines multiple packets together when traffic load is high Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:51:29 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251208 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|bugs@FreeBSD.org |net@FreeBSD.org --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 00:44:13 2020 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 8EC8D473C6B for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CbPFn3SGbz3wCJ for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 769B8473C6A; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 7668D473D6F for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbPFn2tS5z3wW4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 560CB12A0 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AI0iDCY090026 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AI0iDaB090025 for net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251226] ixgbe: resume from real S3 suspend resets the whole system (Intel X520 NIC) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:13 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, iflib X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: greg@unrelenting.technology X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc keywords Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 00:44:13 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251226 Greg V changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |net@FreeBSD.org Keywords|panic |iflib --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 00:44:48 2020 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 4477A474090 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CbPGS1HcSz3wWx for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 2C3AE473E9C; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:48 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 2C08F47401E for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbPGS0jdnz4QrY for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BF8B10F4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AI0ilhV090219 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:47 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AI0ilCH090218 for net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:47 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251226] ixgbe: resume from real S3 suspend resets the whole system (Intel X520 NIC) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:47 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, iflib X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 00:44:48 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251226 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|bugs@FreeBSD.org |net@FreeBSD.org --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 00:44:59 2020 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 2AECC474099 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CbPGg0CLgz4Qvm for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 06AD9474098; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:59 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 0654C474097 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbPGf6S2Rz4Qvl for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEF671328 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AI0iwgx090258 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:58 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AI0iwAa090257 for net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:58 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251226] ixgbe: resume from real S3 suspend resets the whole system (Intel X520 NIC) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:44:59 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, iflib X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 00:44:59 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251226 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|net@FreeBSD.org | --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 07:13:39 2020 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 90FC12E5122; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:13:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rajfbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oi1-x22f.google.com (mail-oi1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbYv63KxNz4lxC; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:13:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rajfbsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-oi1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id d9so1166093oib.3; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:13:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=R/2r2GAn1M0Sooc530sL6kXaFRJYwYUK1VxCizp7Zws=; b=gxWr3zTc8ucz71SasYepbpP8pJoc7BANSLvEYEHvcBsXHhii477f21Z9XqyWsu1x0u iex8LZSyYY/E/DRcu4HmrT6O1rGBMj9PdYRfm2lJhERIFUPAQUvp+tZLYPsAUNwhCBM/ Op/jQt81NE7mktGEr44bBnx94Uv6defyeaiuLaWPYojHK+G0SFLz5vftZfd10qM7nhB3 PMb8SfwUfWGRJF/o0UOY7NFFDfRSfdeWaRGR9AkiRhh2P33reWXKPrxbQmMpXVU4fy1l lCAlYYiRANkCcRFgdZwR0KrCyDZljCYoI22NHm/cNifkB8/M1mQ4cSjRCEHq0vVjPgcU GDKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=R/2r2GAn1M0Sooc530sL6kXaFRJYwYUK1VxCizp7Zws=; b=aQOrYEp+vOKIZNtwpk9puXLDlLIMvTgpPl8YbnMqsZ6AEZQLrVncc4SGcCoUKRtjJk bq2Y6dj0+H7Xth7AyQUq9rka0aS5JcEYLjMXD+cBVf5VUOWyi7f7rHroP6T9P+LMuJAK siMUnWN9L5bO2OFyBI0PGcxfotZGUHblsAwd+L3nDH/Afd0cx1zWzCmEyx4Qkmc5ArPQ 8DmC8IUBWywv2S2bv65eWS8TavTSLKqXVXkgFZQUVyRHEzVhaWWyTTOxdU1yOU6qW/Aw plDP8GghK30o3FUvRARdlvBp7UGujQ4d81iAbdPB1r7rU5qHlv8IgOxOOi2P9Ywil1wm GibA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530KMoNDoJtjFpAXDpy+8XzbqqzOqRMQ9PfOGBroG9Po2mDb2kae GngsRqATA1Laoft/xXPf5k2RQVj8gFtzNOLjI/R1ty8V X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxXfaRWI4A1gYBm1BOKyhbFBhqPvFDzDU2vc7K2a24cF4tYAlDtp0+bNnpYTOUtTzYfdIt0Bc/d7Q/5FLXiSE4= X-Received: by 2002:aca:6548:: with SMTP id j8mr1932453oiw.109.1605683616785; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:13:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Rajesh Kumar Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:43:23 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Hackers X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CbYv63KxNz4lxC X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=gxWr3zTc; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of rajfbsd@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rajfbsd@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.98 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f:from]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2607:f8b0:4000::/36:c]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f:from:127.0.2.255]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.978]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net,freebsd-hackers]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[gmail.com:dkim] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 07:13:39 -0000 Hi, I am testing a 10G Network driver with Netmap "bridge" utility, where it doesn't seem to work. Here is my setup details. *System under Test:* Running FreeBSD CURRENT. Has two inbuilt 10G NIC ports. *System 1:* Running Ubuntu, whose network port is connected to Port1 of System Under Test *System 2:* Running FreeBSD CURRENT, whose network port is connected to Port 0 of System Under Test. Bridged the Port0 and Port1 of System Under Test using the Netmap "bridge" utility. Able to see interfaces coming up active and Link UP. # bridge -c -v -i netmap:ax0 -i netmap:ax1 Then tried pinging from System 1 to System 2. It fails. *Observations:* 1. ARP request from System 1 goes to bridge port 1 (netmap_rxsync) and then forwarded to port 0 (netmap_txsync) 2. ARP request is received in System 2 (via bridge port 0) and ARP reply is being sent from System 2. 3. ARP reply from System 2 seems to be not reaching bridge port 0 to get forwarded to bridge 1 and hence to System 1. 4. Above 3 steps happen 3 times for ARP resolution cycle and then fails. Hence the ping fails. On Debugging, when the ARP reply is being sent from System 2, I don't see any interrupt triggered on the bridge port 0 in system under test. Netstat in system under test, doesn't show any receive or drop counters incremented. But as I understand netstat capture the stats above the netmap stack. Hence not reflecting the counts. *Note:* a) I tried with another vendor 10G NIC card. It behaves the same way. So this issue doesn't seem to be generic and not hardware specific. b) Trying with another vendor 1G NIC card, things are working. So not sure, what makes a difference here. The ports in System 1 and System 2 are USB attached Ethernet capable of maximum speed of 1G. So does connecting 1G to 10G bridge ports is having any impact? c) We have verified the same 10G driver with pkt-gen utility and things are working. Facing issue only when using "bridge" utility. So, wondering how the ARP reply packet is getting lost here. Any ideas to debug? Thanks, Rajesh. From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 08:35:06 2020 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 1075F2E71C3 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Cbbj56vZcz4qjf for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id ED0052E71BD; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 ECC852E6DC1 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cbbj56Jpyz4qf6 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBD8D7057 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AI8Z5Q5072913 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AI8Z5kQ072912 for net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 250922] no packet received by ix(4) card when system booted Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:35:05 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: piotr.pietruszewski@intel.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 08:35:06 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D250922 --- Comment #3 from Piotr Pietruszewski --- Are you seeing any warnings in dmesg? Does the problem occur with the out-of-tree version of the ix driver (https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/14688/Intel-Network-Adapters-Dri= ver-for-PCIe-10-Gigabit-Network-Connections-Under-FreeBSD-?product=3D36773)? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 09:33:47 2020 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 158362E8EBA for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Cbd0p72tKz4tD5 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id F1CB22E8EB9; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 F195F2E8B55 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cbd0p6RG2z4tD4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D01CD7D9D for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AI9XkbS005192 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AI9XkI2005191 for net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 250922] no packet received by ix(4) card when system booted Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:33:47 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: sdalu@sdalu.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 09:33:47 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D250922 --- Comment #4 from sdalu@sdalu.com --- No warning in dmesg. I just try 3.3.18 from the intel site (I followed your link), it is not building: Warning: Object directory not changed from original /root/ix-3.3.18/src cc -O2 -pipe -DSMP -DINET -DINET6 -DIXGBE_STANDALONE_BUILD -fno-strict-aliasing -Werror -D_KERNEL -DKLD_MODULE -nostdinc -I. -I/usr/src/sys -I/usr/src/sys/contrib/ck/include -fno-common=20 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer -fdebug-prefix-map=3D./machine=3D/usr/src/sys/amd64/include -fdebug-prefix-map=3D./x86=3D/usr/src/sys/x86/include -MD -MF.depend.if_= ix.o -MTif_ix.o -mcmodel=3Dkernel -mno-red-zone -mno-mmx -mno-sse -msoft-float=20 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding -fwrapv -fstack-protector -W= all -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-qual -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign -D__printf__=3D__freebsd_kprintf__ -Wmissing-include-dirs -fdiagnostics-show-option -Wno-unknown-pragmas -Wno-error-tautological-comp= are -Wno-error-empty-body -Wno-error-parentheses-equality -Wno-error-unused-function -Wno-error-pointer-sign -Wno-error-shift-negative-value -Wno-address-of-packed-member -mno-aes -mno-avx -std=3Diso9899:1999 -c if_ix.c -o if_ix.o In file included from if_ix.c:42: In file included from ./ixgbe.h:93: ./freebsd_compat_common.h:142:15: error: redefinition of typedef 'iflladdr_cb_t' is a C11 feature [-Werror,-Wtypedef-redefinition] typedef u_int iflladdr_cb_t(void *, struct sockaddr_dl *, u_int); ^ /usr/src/sys/net/if_var.h:742:15: note: previous definition is here typedef u_int iflladdr_cb_t(void *, struct sockaddr_dl *, u_int); ^ 1 error generated. *** Error code 1 --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Nov 18 21:46:10 2020 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 1C767472DD9; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:46:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbxFt0Gc0z4hrg; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:46:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: vmaffione) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA9DF2C9A5; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 21:46:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id a18so2413021pfl.3; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:46:09 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532GSNJZo0efBBU41tldn3rvVA075bcigFQPiHamd/JqC4x/eTwD If+gojiP2SzFDpDKJ0lHVVopfybc2Uf21he94+U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwd5LIx8MTO2po4EDgctCDYy5Tp8Keb4XL9jqsR9Z4TT6BcWak7AbyNskdpICc9+ezpsY5cMhPHoRrfhRURKU8= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:e016:: with SMTP id u22mr1087315pjy.54.1605735968876; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:46:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Vincenzo Maffione Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 22:45:57 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: Rajesh Kumar Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Hackers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 Nov 2020 21:46:10 -0000 Hi, Il giorno mer 18 nov 2020 alle ore 08:13 Rajesh Kumar ha scritto: > Hi, > > I am testing a 10G Network driver with Netmap "bridge" utility, where it > doesn't seem to work. Here is my setup details. > > *System under Test:* Running FreeBSD CURRENT. Has two inbuilt 10G NIC > ports. > *System 1:* Running Ubuntu, whose network port is connected to Port1 of > System Under Test > *System 2:* Running FreeBSD CURRENT, whose network port is connected to > Port 0 of System Under Test. > > Bridged the Port0 and Port1 of System Under Test using the Netmap "bridge" > utility. Able to see interfaces coming up active and Link UP. > # bridge -c -v -i netmap:ax0 -i netmap:ax1 > > This looks like if_axe(4) driver, and therefore there's no native netmap support, which means you are falling back on the emulated netmap adapter. Are these USB dongles? If so, how can they be 10G? > Then tried pinging from System 1 to System 2. It fails. > > *Observations:* > 1. ARP request from System 1 goes to bridge port 1 (netmap_rxsync) and then > forwarded to port 0 (netmap_txsync) > 2. ARP request is received in System 2 (via bridge port 0) and ARP reply is > being sent from System 2. > 3. ARP reply from System 2 seems to be not reaching bridge port 0 to get > forwarded to bridge 1 and hence to System 1. > 4. Above 3 steps happen 3 times for ARP resolution cycle and then fails. > Hence the ping fails. > > On Debugging, when the ARP reply is being sent from System 2, I don't see > any interrupt triggered on the bridge port 0 in system under test. > > In this kind of configuration it is mandatory to disable all the NIC offloads, because netmap does not program the NIC to honor them, e.g.: # ifconfig ax0 -txcsum -rxcsum -tso4 -tso6 -lro -txcsum6 -rxcsum6 # ifconfig ax1 -txcsum -rxcsum -tso4 -tso6 -lro -txcsum6 -rxcsum6 > Netstat in system under test, doesn't show any receive or drop counters > incremented. But as I understand netstat capture the stats above the netmap > stack. Hence not reflecting the counts. > Correct. > > *Note:* > a) I tried with another vendor 10G NIC card. It behaves the same way. So > this issue doesn't seem to be generic and not hardware specific. > Which driver are those NICs using? That makes the difference. I guess it's still a driver with no native netmap support, hence you are using the same emulated adapter. > b) Trying with another vendor 1G NIC card, things are working. So not > sure, what makes a difference here. The ports in System 1 and System 2 are > USB attached Ethernet capable of maximum speed of 1G. So does connecting > 1G to 10G bridge ports is having any impact? > I don't think so. On each p2p link the NICs will negotiate 1G speed. In any case, what driver was this one? > c) We have verified the same 10G driver with pkt-gen utility and things are > working. Facing issue only when using "bridge" utility. > That may be because pkt-gen does not care about checksums, whereas the TCP/IP stack does. Hence the need to disable offloads (see above). Cheers, Vincenzo > So, wondering how the ARP reply packet is getting lost here. Any ideas to > debug? > > Thanks, > Rajesh. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Nov 19 10:02:57 2020 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 701DC2ED939 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:02:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grudarko@gmail.com) Received: from mail-il1-x136.google.com (mail-il1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CcFc05QJxz4TH8 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:02:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grudarko@gmail.com) Received: by mail-il1-x136.google.com with SMTP id q1so4806998ilt.6 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 02:02:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=KWoUNY+IQkP82Gr9/vVTf90cQeVOO/Y1gMohoM6DHS8=; b=e2Ne01oM7gP9lUgTWfBzRLSoDr6mdylCaLrEV3pphXCfiGN1RYVeUMCRfCIrwAhQUQ mtourRoSzQ2Qb16vKT9lZkIt4XXdUVy+CMqzLnhcJvJXdEDwwn35AANTIIy/Dnd2RGH8 P+W5wl4dDOT9aJj8HELoTSeGp1ge4Ywv+m358L27ennjg1dAZrjYzYT9nDJ9hwP0GDFZ u6wnvgW9raqy+F66jRyLZ07XT9ia2wtAuhulL8SvkzWhiBbrZSlEOKp1DoLkFosqjzBN TkBhD87FO8ZiAQu31LwgzA1VlcHoLFw7FJKhWWwRlkuE1OhwYxYpi7fW0rJ+bHadZbAX Jjow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=KWoUNY+IQkP82Gr9/vVTf90cQeVOO/Y1gMohoM6DHS8=; b=Ndil0kXeFAKLEZbISGfGLUgB5mLfD+LlnlCYnqJJmzcRn29//Ww6Om3CWzgZDE2HqI 5UmxmWQSmgNqlzzEDSTTPRLmJD2G+yszMjMaBAudoztX3UlBIZsqGkwXjapRdcVGV/u6 vVKbnBll9gNHP/Z3GnpfkRHKAeeUphlpuuW6goo/kYqipDiZgMeFiMX02pB/FP4qXIPi HdwAz81htlqkqdrntetaXTYRrDVFXzK2xPW8u3tgGxU/MC6bE158OE3+LKDVM7G4+Rif LcQYSS5oy26l+hw6IQdrCygdvuKT3aRY6fxdG8rMWtkU0fJMjPD1Cor/zX8LZVQ4C/u5 fBMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531o2tFLc+MAIHEcj1CRq9fZhx3tqqoxeuYUtRdYsHFNXSipuUEb K/DswcqL3UgX+DQyE+2O/PMWSXvJVMLRKc63dTHkRHUz4/zRjQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxC2M/yfb2vHhG79gwHtz432odYHiMNqtLRzkEgplC0Sj2QdvRu4ncPqeqOrZrjZW1JCs16W61GLFm9rkAdXNo= X-Received: by 2002:a92:c8c4:: with SMTP id c4mr21324367ilq.161.1605780175511; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 02:02:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Darko Grubisic Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:02:44 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: RPS kernel support in FreeBSD? To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CcFc05QJxz4TH8 X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=e2Ne01oM; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of grudarko@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::136 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=grudarko@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.00 / 15.00]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2607:f8b0:4000::/36]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.999]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::136:from]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[gmail.com:dkim]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::136:from:127.0.2.255]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::136:from]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:02:57 -0000 Hi all! I apologize if this is not the proper place to pop the question. I'm interested if there are any plans to integrate RPS and XPS functionality in FreeBSD kernel? Linux has both introduced since 2011. and kernel 2.6.38. The only thing I've found regarding this is an ancient 2011. github project based on FreeBSD 8.2 apparently - https://github.com/gokzy/freebsd-rpsrfs This would be a very nice feature to distribute packet processing inside a VM and I guess I'm not the only one interested in it. Thanks in advance for any info you can provide. Best regards Darko From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Nov 19 11:28:56 2020 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 85A9E2EFFB1; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:28:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rajfbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ot1-x334.google.com (mail-ot1-x334.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CcHWD3Bk7z4YBV; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:28:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rajfbsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ot1-x334.google.com with SMTP id n89so4944999otn.3; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 03:28:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mdN8Uo/HeiG8juRtBFCcYjEG+o6U53xrDKKFwZvI9T0=; b=uua+E2PKC6+RGSRusA9CHyGAfEzYh0Av6dRl5CwhN3KHgESf01b16A2FLeV19RTUH8 une2eyVgA79x6Gg9rEzgi2XKv9VZgCLTB2FexnqyxrIJmH6fH9aoXqsXeuuWFsOaeXi0 Pky7MSdTBbjwgNiW+aF94sPJB+GkldrrlvllmOga+0Ne1iM+RdbKIKaZUpM+sVnXAzeS e04fexwrqVFhCLqbJYqPRxQzoKY7+uLzRUYk0Db9rSB5vmJec1hcpSR/9fEepxuV7Uci rPZ7cWIWNW580am+in9FKAtLugOBVamEdqqs8RmElvYNdoJy/QVFnkf0mENqNxQbWKQu moCg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mdN8Uo/HeiG8juRtBFCcYjEG+o6U53xrDKKFwZvI9T0=; b=FJ56MakSDefmIY1I8nnQoQVpxPyiafHr5whLOYA7kfUaToHqotDYwmViaHMJTWoge7 sLCjp8As2AJFs5dhWeiUBOg0UkDgxRQwHVWCiVUDO344EKYaD4vA+dslbuerYufyPDfx 2CNYecDkD0lCc4ga+vg39QFZNK7Ou1Tw4t9esJoDBQpQpCQ7flr40XKYE9g6bjgRTqYH PgfARbdM7RXJaZQxRmBY9LnYgFjpr7qSQm/J6DsV3tYcvlUaX1QXjBgT5KHChy8j5/fK dr9SwtLfiUVQpUp3JKQHrhLlDaqLBoYSoN/paVxsm6AzUnLi1wjesXUh/B0dHrnDckz9 +Rrg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530hxO1wieBKapU0q/+l2f+danQU6w8mC7QeYkqM3QBy+TmlLxdH L0J0XiTvTaxD2V0pi/QRUgA53r747Ga79dj9owcAdKzP1x8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwavgMaWO4FJQyrT+L7nx8QmJ1QVCwQa70LGnucvWntFrdFK91+Y5X5Zq3phHPAJ5B7TKmXCLuWcBy8M3NHu4g= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:76d7:: with SMTP id p23mr9967605otl.180.1605785334727; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 03:28:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Rajesh Kumar Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:58:42 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: Vincenzo Maffione Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Hackers X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CcHWD3Bk7z4YBV X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:28:56 -0000 Hi Vincenzo, Thanks for your reply. On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 3:16 AM Vincenzo Maffione wrote: > > This looks like if_axe(4) driver, and therefore there's no native netmap > support, which means you are falling back on > the emulated netmap adapter. Are these USB dongles? If so, how can they be > 10G? > The Driver I am working with is "if_axp" (sys/dev/axgbe). This is AMD 10Gigabit Ethernet Driver. This is recently committed upstream. Yes, it doesn't have a Native netmap support, but uses the netmap stack which is existing already. These are inbuilt SFP ports with our test board and not USB dongles. Does Native netmap mean the hardware capability which needs to be programmed appropriately from driver side? Any generic documentation regarding the same? > In this kind of configuration it is mandatory to disable all the NIC > offloads, because netmap does not program the NIC > to honor them, e.g.: > > # ifconfig ax0 -txcsum -rxcsum -tso4 -tso6 -lro -txcsum6 -rxcsum6 > # ifconfig ax1 -txcsum -rxcsum -tso4 -tso6 -lro -txcsum6 -rxcsum6 > Earlier, I haven't tried disabling the Offload capabilities. But I tried now, but it still behaves the same way. ARP replies doesn't seem to reach the bridge (or dropped) to be forwarded. I will collect the details for AMD driver. Tried the same test with another 10G card (Intel "ix" driver) also exhibits similar behavior. Details below. > a) I tried with another vendor 10G NIC card. It behaves the same way. So >> this issue doesn't seem to be generic and not hardware specific. >> > > Which driver are those NICs using? That makes the difference. I guess it's > still a driver with no native netmap support, hence > you are using the same emulated adapter > I am using the "ix" driver (Intel 10G NIC adapter). I guess this driver also doesn't support Native Netmap. Please correct me if I am wrong. I tried disabling the offload capabilities with this device/driver and tested and still observed the netmap bridging fails. root@fbsd_cur# sysctl dev.ix.0 | grep tx_packets dev.ix.0.queue7.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue6.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue5.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue4.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue3.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue2.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue1.tx_packets: 0 *dev.ix.0.queue0.tx_packets: 3* root@fbsd_cur# sysctl dev.ix.0 | grep rx_packets dev.ix.0.queue7.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue6.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue5.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue4.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue3.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue2.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue1.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.0.queue0.rx_packets: 0 root@fbsd_cur # sysctl dev.ix.1 | grep tx_packets dev.ix.1.queue7.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue6.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue5.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue4.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue3.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue2.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue1.tx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue0.tx_packets: 0 root@fbsd_cur # sysctl dev.ix.1 | grep rx_packets dev.ix.1.queue7.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue6.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue5.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue4.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue3.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue2.rx_packets: 0 dev.ix.1.queue1.rx_packets: 0 *dev.ix.1.queue0.rx_packets: 3* You can see "ix1" received 3 packets (ARP requests) from system 1 and transmitted 3 packets to system 2 via "ix0". But ARP reply from system 2 is not captured or forwared properly. You can see the checksum features disabled (except VLAN_HWCSIM) on both interfaces. And you can see both interfaces active and Link up. root@fbsd_cur # ifconfig -a ix0: flags=8862 metric 0 mtu 1500 options=48538b8 ether a0:36:9f:a5:49:90 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) status: active nd6 options=29 ix1: flags=8862 metric 0 mtu 1500 options=48538b8 ether a0:36:9f:a5:49:92 media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT ) status: active nd6 options=29 > > b) Trying with another vendor 1G NIC card, things are working. So not >> sure, what makes a difference here. The ports in System 1 and System 2 >> are >> USB attached Ethernet capable of maximum speed of 1G. So does connecting >> 1G to 10G bridge ports is having any impact? >> > > I don't think so. On each p2p link the NICs will negotiate 1G speed. > In any case, what driver was this one? > This is "igb" driver. Intel 1G NIC Card. Thanks, Rajesh. From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Nov 19 17:55:45 2020 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 7D420471012 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CcS5Y2xzqz3CZT for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 632E5470AF0; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 62F27471011 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CcS5Y2GD8z3Cl4 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41636411 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AJHtjZd092211 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AJHtjbc092210 for net@FreeBSD.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 251208] bridge(4) combines multiple packets together when traffic load is high Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: buhrow@nfbcal.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:55:45 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D251208 --- Comment #1 from Brian Buhrow --- Hello. I forgot to note in the original bug report that there is a vlan attached to em0 in this configuration, but the vlan does not participate in the bridge. And, in checking with tcpdump, it appears that the oversized packets do not coincide with the generation of vlan traffic through the em0 physical interface. This leads me to believe this can be reproduced without a vlan attached to the em0 interface, but in case that is not true, I'm noting the presence of a vlan here as a way of more accurately producing the conditions I'm seeing. -thanks -Brian --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Nov 19 21:50:30 2020 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 5CA49475BD5; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 21:50:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CcYJQ27xGz3hbl; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 21:50:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from mail-pg1-f181.google.com (mail-pg1-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: vmaffione) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 330A0775E; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 21:50:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: by mail-pg1-f181.google.com with SMTP id m9so5464693pgb.4; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:50:30 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532nPHvAjZHt4g33uvYxgMh9IaimwHwGT5yQM3RcYgFvHGdeUOiX m4MjldI/qgZs2SfvvGvoPReh1siqvZvKLHmiJwQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxkWhUT7ndeg0YXYrdmVME254+XCg4pAlvO3R1NXIsWdWiL2g3HxMGliqfBKsr1GNRIyIjK9ugoKDZGJ6TtvU4= X-Received: by 2002:a63:d650:: with SMTP id d16mr13835611pgj.277.1605822629178; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:50:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Vincenzo Maffione Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 22:50:17 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: Rajesh Kumar Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Hackers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 21:50:30 -0000 Il giorno gio 19 nov 2020 alle ore 12:28 Rajesh Kumar ha scritto: > Hi Vincenzo, > > Thanks for your reply. > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 3:16 AM Vincenzo Maffione > wrote: > >> >> This looks like if_axe(4) driver, and therefore there's no native netmap >> support, which means you are falling back on >> the emulated netmap adapter. Are these USB dongles? If so, how can they >> be 10G? >> > > The Driver I am working with is "if_axp" (sys/dev/axgbe). This is AMD > 10Gigabit Ethernet Driver. This is recently committed upstream. Yes, it > doesn't have a Native netmap support, but uses the netmap stack which is > existing already. These are inbuilt SFP ports with our test board and not > USB dongles. > Ok, now it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. I see that if_axp(4) uses iflib(4). This means that actually if_axp(4) has native netmap support, because iflib(4) has native netmap support. > Does Native netmap mean the hardware capability which needs to be > programmed appropriately from driver side? Any generic documentation > regarding the same? > It means that the driver has some modifications to allow netmap to directly program the NIC rings. These modifications are mostly the per-driver txsync and rxsyng routines. In case of iflib(4) drivers, these modifications are provided directly within the iflib(4) code, and therefore any driver using iflib will have native netmap support. > >> In this kind of configuration it is mandatory to disable all the NIC >> offloads, because netmap does not program the NIC >> to honor them, e.g.: >> >> # ifconfig ax0 -txcsum -rxcsum -tso4 -tso6 -lro -txcsum6 -rxcsum6 >> # ifconfig ax1 -txcsum -rxcsum -tso4 -tso6 -lro -txcsum6 -rxcsum6 >> > > Earlier, I haven't tried disabling the Offload capabilities. But I tried > now, but it still behaves the same way. ARP replies doesn't seem to reach > the bridge (or dropped) to be forwarded. I will collect the details for > AMD driver. Tried the same test with another 10G card (Intel "ix" driver) > also exhibits similar behavior. Details below. > Ok, this makes sense, because also ix(4) uses iflib, and therefore you are basically hitting the same issue of if_axp(4) At this point I must think that there is still some issue with the interaction between iflib(4) and netmap(4). > > >> a) I tried with another vendor 10G NIC card. It behaves the same way. So >>> this issue doesn't seem to be generic and not hardware specific. >>> >> >> Which driver are those NICs using? That makes the difference. I guess >> it's still a driver with no native netmap support, hence >> you are using the same emulated adapter >> > > I am using the "ix" driver (Intel 10G NIC adapter). I guess this driver > also doesn't support Native Netmap. Please correct me if I am wrong. I > tried disabling the offload capabilities with this device/driver and tested > and still observed the netmap bridging fails. > As I stated above, ix(4) has netmap support, like any iflib(4) driver. > root@fbsd_cur# sysctl dev.ix.0 | grep tx_packets > dev.ix.0.queue7.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue6.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue5.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue4.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue3.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue2.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue1.tx_packets: 0 > *dev.ix.0.queue0.tx_packets: 3* > root@fbsd_cur# sysctl dev.ix.0 | grep rx_packets > dev.ix.0.queue7.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue6.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue5.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue4.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue3.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue2.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue1.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.0.queue0.rx_packets: 0 > root@fbsd_cur # sysctl dev.ix.1 | grep tx_packets > dev.ix.1.queue7.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue6.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue5.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue4.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue3.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue2.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue1.tx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue0.tx_packets: 0 > root@fbsd_cur # sysctl dev.ix.1 | grep rx_packets > dev.ix.1.queue7.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue6.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue5.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue4.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue3.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue2.rx_packets: 0 > dev.ix.1.queue1.rx_packets: 0 > > *dev.ix.1.queue0.rx_packets: 3* > > You can see "ix1" received 3 packets (ARP requests) from system 1 and > transmitted 3 packets to system 2 via "ix0". But ARP reply from system 2 is > not captured or forwared properly. > I see. This info may be useful. Have you tried to look at interrupts (e.g. `vmstat -i`), to see if "ix0" gets any RX interrupts (for the missing ARP replies)? > > You can see the checksum features disabled (except VLAN_HWCSIM) on both > interfaces. And you can see both interfaces active and Link up. > > root@fbsd_cur # ifconfig -a > ix0: flags=8862 metric 0 mtu 1500 > > options=48538b8 > ether a0:36:9f:a5:49:90 > media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) > status: active > nd6 options=29 > > ix1: flags=8862 metric 0 mtu 1500 > > options=48538b8 > ether a0:36:9f:a5:49:92 > media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT > ) > status: active > nd6 options=29 > >> >> b) Trying with another vendor 1G NIC card, things are working. So not >>> sure, what makes a difference here. The ports in System 1 and System 2 >>> are >>> USB attached Ethernet capable of maximum speed of 1G. So does connecting >>> 1G to 10G bridge ports is having any impact? >>> >> >> I don't think so. On each p2p link the NICs will negotiate 1G speed. >> In any case, what driver was this one? >> > > This is "igb" driver. Intel 1G NIC Card. > Also the igb(4) driver is using iflib(4). So the involved netmap code is the same as ix(4) and if_axp(4). This is something that I'm not able to understand right now. It does not look like something related to offloads. Next week I will try to see if I can reproduce your issue with em(4), and report back. That's still an Intel driver using iflib(4). Thanks, Vincenzo > > Thanks, > Rajesh. > From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Fri Nov 20 12:17:34 2020 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 EF1FD2E8A65 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CcwXt6G0Zz3HsS for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id D6D312E8DEA; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 D6A112E8C12 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CcwXt5gpCz3HvM for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5E79158F4 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AKCHYj4088072 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AKCHY9V088071 for net@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 242159] [em] I219-V connection lost under load Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:34 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: IntelNetworking, iflib, regression X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: julien@perdition.city X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: resolution bug_status Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:17:35 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D242159 Julien Cigar changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|New |Closed --- Comment #2 from Julien Cigar --- This problem doesn't occur anymore on 12.2 (and latest -pxx 12.1) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Fri Nov 20 13:01:23 2020 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 5DE992E99E0 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CcxWR21knz3Lt0 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 4561D2E994C; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 452D52E99DF for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CcxWR1PKFz3Lp4 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2367D16566 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0AKD1N45010073 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from bugzilla@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 0AKD1NKh010072 for net@FreeBSD.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: bugzilla set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 250499] [tcp] Should we reject the packet with timestamp if no timestamp in SYN and SYN_ACK? Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:22 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: standards X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: commit-hook@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: tuexen@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: mfc-stable12? mfc-stable11? X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:01:23 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D250499 --- Comment #2 from commit-hook@FreeBSD.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: tuexen Date: Fri Nov 20 13:00:29 UTC 2020 New revision: 367891 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/367891 Log: Fix an issue I introuced in r367530: tcp_twcheck() can be called with to =3D=3D NULL for SYN segments. So don't assume tp !=3D NULL. Thanks to jhb@ for reporting and suggesting a fix. PR: 250499 MFC after: 1 week XMFC-with: r367530 Sponsored by: Netflix, Inc. Changes: head/sys/netinet/tcp_timewait.c --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.= From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Fri Nov 20 13:31:12 2020 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 AD1F22EA877; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:31:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rajfbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ot1-x330.google.com (mail-ot1-x330.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::330]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Ccy9r34vsz3NBf; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:31:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rajfbsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ot1-x330.google.com with SMTP id y22so8677253oti.10; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:31:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4en2qv4i/arwzRLCSEaR6mvJfko42IYgg5QLnPVzn+Y=; b=LzpZ+ReOQ1nRLgTUmfUuVzleNT4/R7tgvNN5z/7AS000hkZVC135Hf8lK9kUwZiFAz 7UG13xgoLwBfANmLkBHpqtwPF0YXAp4Bn9hi5T6JpU6OEnK94fanCUm8a5tyfPiT9yQ+ BidDwZXgZIoQinkUE+iGyqP3TErn3JxB7/46MubihcSQiePROT8eX3Ows7lLO+Rv61uq TtELQj0zjCr18+DC1anxa8zA5754JUs875eYYZlUiIADhmSF96JuBfmqkNGl2c3xATtb jd8Y0ihPSZefHCgwwpgCza8V6d12uNFGKt+Qan/lcbUiEUxlNlqZaxlUqFym7WXt0qgF Dy9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4en2qv4i/arwzRLCSEaR6mvJfko42IYgg5QLnPVzn+Y=; b=o2aTL6vabfKt1bW2zuPNAVucwCrAHB50dLJlj5d2Dc6HIbFUMt5IZzWdtLDAM1L7gs 9whXWsrMBQk0XP4zLJXPZaVdJljwT6i1I0iuwmd10riRHASP7Ie1tOvXsREw69u0VOq/ zTLL2wSlbbMPlurWBqEFIhFKlHnBFcA2ShqC36hHfrxn1Oi8mBKD10TxXw6CVSaqPa8X o3YgQcRIz34Yd5D0ez+OXL4LqfcAavAbS+/TvFnc0V7C1gwxlyvWuudC23qUrKiGdlI6 +4DCT6Y8nKVGeKoFn9LvTci73z7w1T19KA8m6Rf8o2hG+Vebrws6netpeJFKf8/i+mSS bd5g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530HFhDtQ3JOV8H8nV9lHN6TVyw2CQXV2bxZGP4fm3I4H7mb5ojM 6f0cD51XK+fBnLrcZZvMILYHV+wwAT8K1bQ6LsSBJdUjq7s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzwqeIlDwhfyFPO56tpkRBAKLM2hglPfoTqRWxboSnFq5Wvqv7RoKcnkds94ft9dZ9HOrOvPphodzczyXhMYvU= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:76d7:: with SMTP id p23mr14042591otl.180.1605879071060; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:31:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Rajesh Kumar Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 19:00:59 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: Vincenzo Maffione Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Hackers , stephan.dewt@yahoo.co.uk X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Ccy9r34vsz3NBf X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:31:12 -0000 Hi Vincenzo, On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:20 AM Vincenzo Maffione wrote: > > Ok, now it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. I see that if_axp(4) uses > iflib(4). This means that actually if_axp(4) has native netmap support, > because iflib(4) has native netmap support. > > It means that the driver has some modifications to allow netmap to directly > program the NIC rings. These modifications are mostly the per-driver txsync > and rxsyng routines. > In case of iflib(4) drivers, these modifications are provided directly > within the iflib(4) code, and therefore any driver using iflib will have > native netmap support. > Thanks for clarifying on the Native Netmap support. Ok, this makes sense, because also ix(4) uses iflib, and therefore you are > basically hitting the same issue of if_axp(4) > At this point I must think that there is still some issue with the > interaction between iflib(4) and netmap(4). > Ok. Let me know if any more debug info needed in this part. I see. This info may be useful. Have you tried to look at interrupts (e.g. > `vmstat -i`), to see if "ix0" gets any RX interrupts (for the missing ARP > replies)? > It's interesting here. When I try with Intel NIC card. I see atleast 1 interrupt raised. But not sure whether that is for ARP reply. Because, when I try to dump the packet from "bridge"(modified) utility, I don't see any ARP reply packet getting dumped. *irq59: ix0:rxq0 1 0 (only 1 interrupt on the opposite side)*irq67: ix0:aq 2 0 *irq68: ix1:rxq0 3 0 (you can see 3 interrupts for 3 ARP requests from System 1)*irq76: ix1:aq 2 0 The same experiment, when I try with AMD inbuilt ports, I don't see that 1 interrupt also raised. irq81: ax0:dev_irq 16 0 irq83: ax0 2541 4 irq93: ax1:dev_irq 27 0 irq95: ax1 2371 3 *irq97: ax1:rxq0 3 0 (you can see 3 interrupts for 3 ARP requests from System 1, but no interrupt is seen from "ax0:rxq0" for ARP reply from System 2)* I will do some more testing to see whether this behavior is consistent or intermittent. Also the igb(4) driver is using iflib(4). So the involved netmap code is > the same as ix(4) and if_axp(4). > This is something that I'm not able to understand right now. > It does not look like something related to offloads. > > Next week I will try to see if I can reproduce your issue with em(4), and > report back. That's still an Intel driver using iflib(4). > The "igb(4)" driver, with which things are working now is related to em(4) driver (may be for newer hardware version). Initially we faced similar issue with igb(4) driver as well. After reverting the following commits, things started to work. Thanks to Stephan Dewt (copied) for pointing this. But it still fails with ix(4) driver and if_axp(4) driver. https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/commit/e12efc2c9e434075d0740e2e2e9e2fca2ad5f7cf Thanks for providing your inputs on this issue Vincenzo. Let me know for any more details that you need. Thanks, Rajesh. From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Nov 21 16:06:38 2020 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 7F3E8469F70; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 16:06:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CddZk374yz4rNL; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 16:06:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from mail-pg1-f174.google.com (mail-pg1-f174.google.com [209.85.215.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: vmaffione) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54D032B4FD; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 16:06:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: by mail-pg1-f174.google.com with SMTP id f17so1610276pge.6; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 08:06:38 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533b+Kbh1yUf1skzGncrjEfmBk4erE3Joim6OBRQCQAqwCplwbeK cQgLjEFKUqJYuDiLHz6OWd5JzBRVFcNu8q2YaVM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTruSs1RR5ioxUncuty5+Oj6xQF8Y425PD0r6hdVbKpr9Qmdp+sFyesrCvahiWP82P5cGKRBAq4PjlHA2bD/I= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:e615:: with SMTP id j21mr11741439pjy.74.1605974797327; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 08:06:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Vincenzo Maffione Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:06:26 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: Rajesh Kumar Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Hackers , stephan.dewt@yahoo.co.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 16:06:38 -0000 Il giorno ven 20 nov 2020 alle ore 14:31 Rajesh Kumar ha scritto: > Hi Vincenzo, > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:20 AM Vincenzo Maffione > wrote: > >> >> Ok, now it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. I see that if_axp(4) uses >> iflib(4). This means that actually if_axp(4) has native netmap support, >> because iflib(4) has native netmap support. >> >> > It means that the driver has some modifications to allow netmap to >> directly program the NIC rings. These modifications are mostly the >> per-driver txsync and rxsyng routines. >> In case of iflib(4) drivers, these modifications are provided directly >> within the iflib(4) code, and therefore any driver using iflib will have >> native netmap support. >> > > Thanks for clarifying on the Native Netmap support. > > Ok, this makes sense, because also ix(4) uses iflib, and therefore you are >> basically hitting the same issue of if_axp(4) >> At this point I must think that there is still some issue with the >> interaction between iflib(4) and netmap(4). >> > > Ok. Let me know if any more debug info needed in this part. > > I see. This info may be useful. Have you tried to look at interrupts (e.g. >> `vmstat -i`), to see if "ix0" gets any RX interrupts (for the missing ARP >> replies)? >> > > It's interesting here. When I try with Intel NIC card. I see atleast 1 > interrupt raised. But not sure whether that is for ARP reply. Because, > when I try to dump the packet from "bridge"(modified) utility, I don't see > any ARP reply packet getting dumped. > > > *irq59: ix0:rxq0 1 0 (only 1 interrupt on > the opposite side)*irq67: ix0:aq 2 0 > > *irq68: ix1:rxq0 3 0 (you can see 3 > interrupts for 3 ARP requests from System 1)*irq76: ix1:aq > 2 0 > > The same experiment, when I try with AMD inbuilt ports, I don't see that 1 > interrupt also raised. > > irq81: ax0:dev_irq 16 0 > irq83: ax0 2541 4 > irq93: ax1:dev_irq 27 0 > irq95: ax1 2371 3 > *irq97: ax1:rxq0 3 0 (you can see 3 > interrupts for 3 ARP requests from System 1, but no interrupt is seen from > "ax0:rxq0" for ARP reply from System 2)* > > I will do some more testing to see whether this behavior is consistent or > intermittent. > > Also the igb(4) driver is using iflib(4). So the involved netmap code is >> the same as ix(4) and if_axp(4). >> This is something that I'm not able to understand right now. >> It does not look like something related to offloads. >> >> Next week I will try to see if I can reproduce your issue with em(4), and >> report back. That's still an Intel driver using iflib(4). >> > > The "igb(4)" driver, with which things are working now is related to em(4) > driver (may be for newer hardware version). Initially we faced similar > issue with igb(4) driver as well. After reverting the following commits, > things started to work. Thanks to Stephan Dewt (copied) for pointing > this. But it still fails with ix(4) driver and if_axp(4) driver. > > > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/commit/e12efc2c9e434075d0740e2e2e9e2fca2ad5f7cf > > Thanks for providing your inputs on this issue Vincenzo. Let me know for > any more details that you need. > > I was able to reproduce your issue on FreeBSD-CURRENT running within a QEMU VM, with two em(4) devices and the netmap bridge running between them. I see the ARP request packet received on em0 (with associated IRQ), and forwarded on em1. However, the ARP reply coming on em1 does not trigger an IRQ on em1, and indeed the NIC RX head/tail pointers are not incremented as they should (`sysctl -a | grep em.1 | grep queue_rx`) ... that is weird, and lets me think that the issue is more likely driver-related than netmap/iflib-related. In any case, would you mind filing the issue on the bugzilla, so that we can properly track this issue? Thanks, Vincenzo > Thanks, > Rajesh. > From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Nov 21 17:10:01 2020 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 4007F46B6F5; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:10:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cdfzs1CPtz4vDl; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:10:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: from mail-pf1-f181.google.com (mail-pf1-f181.google.com [209.85.210.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) (Authenticated sender: vmaffione) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1103E2BAB3; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:10:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vmaffione@freebsd.org) Received: by mail-pf1-f181.google.com with SMTP id q5so10926719pfk.6; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 09:10:01 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531mn7rklCnZnUKdGVSy9dZnN1gIEewmmmI2eEt2Kt10KnEDb9LR mga8A77Cr9KsK2AfNHftYjuHLWqJnfpFKOz4Wo0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx8Jf7W42lSmVzyWznHbYgvhw/ctIjHNCFDUEbnILzm1Y/hXq1DTcXZHRQHOMJqXWxN8ydtoUSSW3WXjUew3z8= X-Received: by 2002:a63:d650:: with SMTP id d16mr20748756pgj.277.1605978600110; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 09:10:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Vincenzo Maffione Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:09:47 +0100 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Netmap bridge not working with 10G Ethernet ports To: Rajesh Kumar Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Hackers , stephan.dewt@yahoo.co.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:10:01 -0000 Hi Rajesh, I think the issue here is simply that you have not enabled promiscuous mode on your interfaces. # ifconfig ix0 promisc # ifconfig ix1 promisc This is an additional requirement when using netmap bridge, because that is not done automatically (differently from what happens with if_bridge(4)). If promisc is not enabled, the NIC will drop any unicast packet that is not directed to the NIC's address (e.g. the ARP reply in your case). Broadcast packets will of course pass (e.g. the ARP request). This explains the absence of IRQs and the head/tail pointers not being updated. So no bugs AFAIK. I figured it out the hard way, but it was actually also documented on the github (https://github.com/luigirizzo/netmap#receiver-does-not-receive). I will add it to the netmap bridge man page. Cheers, Vincenzo Il giorno sab 21 nov 2020 alle ore 17:06 Vincenzo Maffione < vmaffione@freebsd.org> ha scritto: > > > Il giorno ven 20 nov 2020 alle ore 14:31 Rajesh Kumar > ha scritto: > >> Hi Vincenzo, >> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:20 AM Vincenzo Maffione >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Ok, now it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying. I see that if_axp(4) uses >>> iflib(4). This means that actually if_axp(4) has native netmap support, >>> because iflib(4) has native netmap support. >>> >>> >> It means that the driver has some modifications to allow netmap to >>> directly program the NIC rings. These modifications are mostly the >>> per-driver txsync and rxsyng routines. >>> In case of iflib(4) drivers, these modifications are provided directly >>> within the iflib(4) code, and therefore any driver using iflib will have >>> native netmap support. >>> >> >> Thanks for clarifying on the Native Netmap support. >> >> Ok, this makes sense, because also ix(4) uses iflib, and therefore you >>> are basically hitting the same issue of if_axp(4) >>> At this point I must think that there is still some issue with the >>> interaction between iflib(4) and netmap(4). >>> >> >> Ok. Let me know if any more debug info needed in this part. >> >> I see. This info may be useful. Have you tried to look at interrupts >>> (e.g. `vmstat -i`), to see if "ix0" gets any RX interrupts (for the missing >>> ARP replies)? >>> >> >> It's interesting here. When I try with Intel NIC card. I see atleast 1 >> interrupt raised. But not sure whether that is for ARP reply. Because, >> when I try to dump the packet from "bridge"(modified) utility, I don't see >> any ARP reply packet getting dumped. >> >> >> *irq59: ix0:rxq0 1 0 (only 1 interrupt on >> the opposite side)*irq67: ix0:aq 2 0 >> >> *irq68: ix1:rxq0 3 0 (you can see 3 >> interrupts for 3 ARP requests from System 1)*irq76: ix1:aq >> 2 0 >> >> The same experiment, when I try with AMD inbuilt ports, I don't see that >> 1 interrupt also raised. >> >> irq81: ax0:dev_irq 16 0 >> irq83: ax0 2541 4 >> irq93: ax1:dev_irq 27 0 >> irq95: ax1 2371 3 >> *irq97: ax1:rxq0 3 0 (you can see 3 >> interrupts for 3 ARP requests from System 1, but no interrupt is seen from >> "ax0:rxq0" for ARP reply from System 2)* >> >> I will do some more testing to see whether this behavior is consistent or >> intermittent. >> >> Also the igb(4) driver is using iflib(4). So the involved netmap code is >>> the same as ix(4) and if_axp(4). >>> This is something that I'm not able to understand right now. >>> It does not look like something related to offloads. >>> >>> Next week I will try to see if I can reproduce your issue with em(4), >>> and report back. That's still an Intel driver using iflib(4). >>> >> >> The "igb(4)" driver, with which things are working now is related to >> em(4) driver (may be for newer hardware version). Initially we faced >> similar issue with igb(4) driver as well. After reverting the following >> commits, things started to work. Thanks to Stephan Dewt (copied) for >> pointing this. But it still fails with ix(4) driver and if_axp(4) driver. >> >> >> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/commit/e12efc2c9e434075d0740e2e2e9e2fca2ad5f7cf >> >> Thanks for providing your inputs on this issue Vincenzo. Let me know for >> any more details that you need. >> >> > I was able to reproduce your issue on FreeBSD-CURRENT running within a > QEMU VM, with two em(4) devices and the netmap bridge running between them. > I see the ARP request packet received on em0 (with associated IRQ), and > forwarded on em1. However, the ARP reply coming on em1 does not trigger an > IRQ on em1, and indeed the NIC RX head/tail pointers are not incremented as > they should (`sysctl -a | grep em.1 | grep queue_rx`) ... that is weird, > and lets me think that the issue is more likely driver-related than > netmap/iflib-related. > In any case, would you mind filing the issue on the bugzilla, so that we > can properly track this issue? > > Thanks, > Vincenzo > > >> Thanks, >> Rajesh. >> > From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Nov 21 18:24:35 2020 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 0A43746D566 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:24:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scf@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.farley.org (farley.org [104.129.130.189]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cdhdt4XVFz3GSZ for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:24:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scf@FreeBSD.org) Received: from thor.farley.org (thor.farley.org [192.168.1.5]) by mail.farley.org (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTP id 0ALIONGC077813 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 13:24:23 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from scf@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 13:24:23 -0500 (EST) From: "Sean C. Farley" To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Determining cause of transfer limit Message-ID: <9d7b39fb-7c1-fe7b-fa9a-ab1aa89cb96a@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mail.farley.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Cdhdt4XVFz3GSZ X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 15.00]; ASN(0.00)[asn:396949, ipnet:104.129.130.0/24, country:US]; local_wl_from(0.00)[FreeBSD.org] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:24:35 -0000 I have recently upped my Internet service and have now noticed a limit being reached, but I am not certain which limit and best option to resolve it. I am using a circa 2007 system as a multi-purpose router running FreeBSD 12-STABLE (r367740). The issue is that it maxes out around 400Mb/s when running a speed test through it between my workstation and various test sites (i.e., DSL Reports and Speedtest). There are two NIC's (both are Intel 82541PI) in use with one to the ISP and one to my workstation. At first, I saw one of them apparently hitting an interrupt rate of just over 8000, so I bumped their rate limits higher with little to no improvement. What makes me believe I can theoretically get faster speeds is that I can use the onboard NIC (Marvell 88E8056) to replace one of the NIC's and nearly double the speed. The difference is that it is on the PCI-E bus and has MSI support. irq16: em0:irq0+ irq17: em1:irq0 irq20: hpet0 irq258: mskc0 I have many network settings, but changing them did nothing. Here are the settings I am trying now that seem to squeak a little extra performance. The commented-out lines are ones I tried without seeing any change. I have also tested without these settings. /boot/loader.conf hw.em.rx_process_limit="-1" # dev.em.0.iflib.override_nrxds="2048" # dev.em.1.iflib.override_nrxds="2048" # dev.em.2.iflib.override_nrxds="2048" # dev.em.0.iflib.override_ntxds="2048" # net.link.ifqmaxlen="2048" hw.em.max_interrupt_rate="32000" # net.isr.maxthreads="-1" # net.isr.bindthreads="1" /etc/sysctl.conf kern.random.harvest.mask=351 dev.em.0.fc=0 dev.em.1.fc=0 dev.em.0.itr=122 # Allow past 8000 interrupts/second. dev.em.1.itr=122 net.inet.ip.redirect=0 net.inet6.ip6.redirect=0 Increasing these from 66 to 250 did not help: hw.em.rx_abs_int_delay: 66 hw.em.tx_abs_int_delay: 66 hw.em.tx_int_delay: 66 I am utilizing pf, but I doubt it is the issue since using the same rules with the msk driver would have held the speed down to 400Mb/s. Am I hitting the limit of the PCI bus (memory or interrupt) or something else? I can buy a new PCI-E NIC for the internal network, but I rather fully utilize the Intel NIC's I have, if possible. Sean -- scf@FreeBSD.org From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Nov 21 21:56:21 2020 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 645E0471E84 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:56:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CdnLD3tBLz3hZ3 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:56:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kudzu@tenebras.com) Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id 142so13845371ljj.10 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 13:56:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tenebras-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qQIwDCdsFYDhMy3nng8wEZaYM+RFdQsOvEUQzxWby+I=; b=mCTTfxrETC2U+78AryjwI3x5F2cmX6BtSrsYlGMyVr3P4DQbn2QcvE+27kfw3hkwef Oe1TA6TaSGdb6LUdeK4oVkunT+1zobkLDSXZOjFIuNOGN2z7+kgqWEgY4F6E8RdmLO8U VHCVa5AaNJkSUOv3fKi5MqhF3tfd46Glm6OGjudFv2qGa/ruWs0LbOq37vhkwt5eUHda B1utQXmEUVlbke7sB/GMLvOK8hjMSdc9uVJhB5Y6yVFNfV15rO0IESMKwb8WpDOhWiYv QH1Sq8dHojWpgHZ5kBp6M80tzLcgov9pkpLIcWeZ5TfwGvhICVQUIuDo9yw5yahSnkq+ 3HLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qQIwDCdsFYDhMy3nng8wEZaYM+RFdQsOvEUQzxWby+I=; b=sgQwRhHSNIvcpTkeDsESfUx+RMETxDoE8c9HioBfzluRSHJCJRXnl5h4nQREQUvoqn uKC+HjUjOCYAPSZMsOKnz4TvGpTiYVXoiwrfxW51hP1NFIajcEy8x6w0MpefVqtJ2nKa g3cLYQD7kJ8EShfSxRF7xJE8ntO/Bswdz5o1/TAledt2Oo0gaKlseMRMh/lCJNEn4/GP Zt1t4zYOn+uSmLNqbkBkWAlh8nntgRvFVB4HP4Gw7hGIp0H6UAv+SyouFyJx38H3T+Q0 jD+qPSaMayJqJ5EObyJ7NsZT8FvEv7BlGipzZzBG/jBzOa/Y/omqzzdSBjqiY5YCt6Rc 7O0w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533GxTwXszdpfYcNIrvHoUGo6hfbpTBFbS+/nHPsAbYet/Mj/SWb SDvod5i8URvXYKKpoT4kQNjm/GbNDrKP0DFFal38hg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyWLLg2SovfchSctLJEe+59gSRxOd0BYysVHdRhlf3a0BUHi7Hmh178yzM6QuooyyjEHe09E7KTeujr1cz6ps0= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8891:: with SMTP id k17mr9888409lji.326.1605995778308; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 13:56:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9d7b39fb-7c1-fe7b-fa9a-ab1aa89cb96a@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <9d7b39fb-7c1-fe7b-fa9a-ab1aa89cb96a@FreeBSD.org> From: Michael Sierchio Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 13:55:42 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Determining cause of transfer limit To: "Sean C. Farley" Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CdnLD3tBLz3hZ3 X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=tenebras-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=mCTTfxrE; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of kudzu@tenebras.com has no SPF policy when checking 2a00:1450:4864:20::22a) smtp.mailfrom=kudzu@tenebras.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.30 / 15.00]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[tenebras-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com:s=20150623]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[tenebras.com]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::22a:from:127.0.2.255]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[tenebras-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::22a:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.999]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::22a:from]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.34 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:56:21 -0000 Sorry for the top post. Have you tried device polling? From /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/NOTES: ##################################################################### # NETWORKING OPTIONS # # DEVICE_POLLING adds support for mixed interrupt-polling handling # of network device drivers, which has significant benefits in terms # of robustness to overloads and responsivity, as well as permitting # accurate scheduling of the CPU time between kernel network processing # and other activities. The drawback is a moderate (up to 1/HZ seconds) # potential increase in response times. # It is strongly recommended to use HZ=3D1000 or 2000 with DEVICE_POLLING # to achieve smoother behaviour. # Additionally, you can enable/disable polling at runtime with help of # the ifconfig(8) utility, and select the CPU fraction reserved to # userland with the sysctl variable kern.polling.user_frac # (default 50, range 0..100). # # Not all device drivers support this mode of operation at the time of # this writing. See polling(4) for more details. options DEVICE_POLLING On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 10:24 AM Sean C. Farley wrote: > I have recently upped my Internet service and have now noticed a limit > being reached, but I am not certain which limit and best option to > resolve it. > > I am using a circa 2007 system as a multi-purpose router running FreeBSD > 12-STABLE (r367740). The issue is that it maxes out around 400Mb/s when > running a speed test through it between my workstation and various test > sites (i.e., DSL Reports and Speedtest). There are two NIC's (both are > Intel 82541PI) in use with one to the ISP and one to my workstation. > > At first, I saw one of them apparently hitting an interrupt rate of just > over 8000, so I bumped their rate limits higher with little to no > improvement. > > What makes me believe I can theoretically get faster speeds is that I > can use the onboard NIC (Marvell 88E8056) to replace one of the NIC's > and nearly double the speed. The difference is that it is on the PCI-E > bus and has MSI support. > > irq16: em0:irq0+ > irq17: em1:irq0 > irq20: hpet0 > irq258: mskc0 > > I have many network settings, but changing them did nothing. Here are > the settings I am trying now that seem to squeak a little extra > performance. The commented-out lines are ones I tried without seeing > any change. I have also tested without these settings. > > /boot/loader.conf > hw.em.rx_process_limit=3D"-1" > # dev.em.0.iflib.override_nrxds=3D"2048" > # dev.em.1.iflib.override_nrxds=3D"2048" > # dev.em.2.iflib.override_nrxds=3D"2048" > # dev.em.0.iflib.override_ntxds=3D"2048" > # net.link.ifqmaxlen=3D"2048" > hw.em.max_interrupt_rate=3D"32000" > # net.isr.maxthreads=3D"-1" > # net.isr.bindthreads=3D"1" > > /etc/sysctl.conf > kern.random.harvest.mask=3D351 > dev.em.0.fc=3D0 > dev.em.1.fc=3D0 > dev.em.0.itr=3D122 # Allow past 8000 interrupts/second. > dev.em.1.itr=3D122 > net.inet.ip.redirect=3D0 > net.inet6.ip6.redirect=3D0 > > Increasing these from 66 to 250 did not help: > hw.em.rx_abs_int_delay: 66 > hw.em.tx_abs_int_delay: 66 > hw.em.tx_int_delay: 66 > > I am utilizing pf, but I doubt it is the issue since using the same > rules with the msk driver would have held the speed down to 400Mb/s. > > Am I hitting the limit of the PCI bus (memory or interrupt) or something > else? I can buy a new PCI-E NIC for the internal network, but I rather > fully utilize the Intel NIC's I have, if possible. > > Sean > -- > scf@FreeBSD.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > --=20 "Well," Brahm=C4=81 said, "even after ten thousand explanations, a fool is = no wiser, but an intelligent person requires only two thousand five hundred." - The Mah=C4=81bh=C4=81rata From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Nov 21 22:22:07 2020 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 960D4471E67 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:22:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com) Received: from mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com (mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com [148.163.153.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.pphosted.com", Issuer "Thawte RSA CA 2018" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cdnvz2qwrz3jVj; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:22:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com) Received: from pps.filterd (m0101310.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 0ALMG7fJ017318; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:22:06 -0500 Received: from nam10-mw2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-mw2nam10lp2101.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.55.101]) by mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 34yad6r3e5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:22:05 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=UU55d95yuRlBKYVSNn2Au5GPNQQsfQ30qgxtCgYnamqBBHuI9yxNZ/eVNb+eJ8EKMYnuxwEc34FVRn/O+qqoblrxUnm7tgOAGIejDmNaCSxyHWHpWhtcFmM/POOBDbx13yv7efDrTbmQjJnh/iUp0TX4Spr4deTnQ8e3P4RffZvVRjUwmD/8J/uqRWiiHLEpJxTMY0VjXv+6wxYt8gfmt4rAnPWw5jYZLhR5nslvCFpVIpIeE4Az03h6/wSbFWd0s1k8mPF8jqBz0Md3BeWgFuqOl9EIXVUO0FhVJOpsNPJeSJe4SnEv702EZ1+lwUl/p7gPDSgKSp3IlPIGeqlb+Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SvigKgEz0s7tMOB/s05FIUeTuuX+8wiTADRfRIL6cZ4=; b=NeKoIzftMKS7XZUNevqeq4OMYOzSnL+s55EUyI/AKrkBuLMd1gFFCLsitzcLgd83mC8b4T8PDKblMS3MrsxvF1l9ZE5AP/EMdRzC14S2oz/QIvkPxJ9j1gc9wrO+4UG31ElLxD+EFs7PSxRi5aKnOIPi+sYKcXluVGMZSZ8zcATKTmKHJrYoZMSrEizmjaht1GKe6ym2UYqkwloorYihhn6PZA4fkQ8qq4J15TIYOWYm0ezYs4o+J+WBhXSjpe6xL6gDXHGnOEJx3sk1X2/PjwH/tZqaZT/P3QF3CTDYFz003NQ/BFwKgbO0dGltJwEk3W2nyHK1nmDep2vH5jdtbA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lucera.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=lucera.com; dkim=pass header.d=lucera.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bgccs.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-bgccs-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=SvigKgEz0s7tMOB/s05FIUeTuuX+8wiTADRfRIL6cZ4=; b=mjv8fe88pj7zFR9AiZNG79f9mTtO87aEZsb0ZXAgP1i5mLksXMVGMEkHOPmh5C2McBqqoNi/TGoPLQvl5TsBUpl8mETBUE+p6UDc4C51L4GqjZ/SCU0eHW3pCgBf4f6Msn5BNYCOBIlym4rAu5tEb67cVdAS3n15Sgka1hB7hws= Received: from BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:8d::29) by BL0PR12MB4691.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:84::30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3589.22; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:22:00 +0000 Received: from BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ecf2:6e89:1581:11a]) by BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ecf2:6e89:1581:11a%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3564.035; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:22:00 +0000 From: "Saad, Mark" To: Michael Sierchio , "Sean C. Farley" CC: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Determining cause of transfer limit Thread-Topic: Determining cause of transfer limit Thread-Index: AQHWwDOXAENA8npM3Ui/vCDCatVqsKnTIbUAgAAHA/k= Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:22:00 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9d7b39fb-7c1-fe7b-fa9a-ab1aa89cb96a@FreeBSD.org>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [96.232.87.29] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c6be99bd-db83-440f-e3c6-08d88e6bdd90 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BL0PR12MB4691: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:2512; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: Ms9zhZCgVObWUeMNSZDM9J/iRG3KCnAFTEx/+xKv6o91+v3/6S+FICXRVQdO3gd0b9bna+gGtNm/0iqclZKVh6yFUX/HkoWCi2nKzHcbuT/hsgiTpzrhn0unNOUgbd46Hjoq8wDgI+KoU0JBH5kAcvOMN43yzKDPe3zBp/MvLDT5wM7T5Hic66+43Y1ZAxBb85Y/0lwirjv+oQ0xSu6Bz9hDK1UvcSv8gczWGcfGy9XJG69mST6xgTInGUW858ykc2toGeZpEa+7pq+YtT3ZLs+o8rROT9DJnfT+mjqHRRwRaaJAGnh512phDSrZa2Qma8AGOsGoSnHRZknK70+Q1kEdz0A6MYb4LOrkXcbCXMVvBJe/NvPwZ85p5z2CcZ9chlIsQpYvN6bue0Wg3fyWzg== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(346002)(366004)(39860400002)(376002)(136003)(396003)(7696005)(71200400001)(9686003)(110136005)(8676002)(6506007)(478600001)(52536014)(316002)(53546011)(66446008)(8936002)(33656002)(76116006)(4326008)(186003)(66556008)(26005)(64756008)(66476007)(66946007)(966005)(5660300002)(83380400001)(55016002)(66574015)(86362001)(2906002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-4" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: lucera.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c6be99bd-db83-440f-e3c6-08d88e6bdd90 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Nov 2020 22:22:00.0701 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: cfeb5f5e-839a-44b8-ab46-47157d8f1241 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: m9ZJQdWq6d6Mbdj+Ywdcfklp1C3tLcGNhVOdPI3obTl5lAqCSrYJN5PphmXS1iFCb0kKM9tbyTGYLuo7dCy4Xw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL0PR12MB4691 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-11-21_04:2020-11-20, 2020-11-21 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1011 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011210156 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Cdnvz2qwrz3jVj X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:22:07 -0000 scf can I use polling on sfxge ? Also if I want to use polling on say ix or s= fxge does this break things like pf, bird or nsd ? --- Mark Saad Lucera Financial Infrastructures, LLC msaad@lucera.com ________________________________________ From: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org on beha= lf of Michael Sierchio Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2020 4:55 PM To: Sean C. Farley Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Determining cause of transfer limit Sorry for the top post. Have you tried device polling? From /usr/src/sys/amd64/conf/NOTES: ##################################################################### # NETWORKING OPTIONS # # DEVICE_POLLING adds support for mixed interrupt-polling handling # of network device drivers, which has significant benefits in terms # of robustness to overloads and responsivity, as well as permitting # accurate scheduling of the CPU time between kernel network processing # and other activities. The drawback is a moderate (up to 1/HZ seconds) # potential increase in response times. # It is strongly recommended to use HZ=3D1000 or 2000 with DEVICE_POLLING # to achieve smoother behaviour. # Additionally, you can enable/disable polling at runtime with help of # the ifconfig(8) utility, and select the CPU fraction reserved to # userland with the sysctl variable kern.polling.user_frac # (default 50, range 0..100). # # Not all device drivers support this mode of operation at the time of # this writing. See polling(4) for more details. options DEVICE_POLLING On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 10:24 AM Sean C. Farley wrote: > I have recently upped my Internet service and have now noticed a limit > being reached, but I am not certain which limit and best option to > resolve it. > > I am using a circa 2007 system as a multi-purpose router running FreeBSD > 12-STABLE (r367740). The issue is that it maxes out around 400Mb/s when > running a speed test through it between my workstation and various test > sites (i.e., DSL Reports and Speedtest). There are two NIC's (both are > Intel 82541PI) in use with one to the ISP and one to my workstation. > > At first, I saw one of them apparently hitting an interrupt rate of just > over 8000, so I bumped their rate limits higher with little to no > improvement. > > What makes me believe I can theoretically get faster speeds is that I > can use the onboard NIC (Marvell 88E8056) to replace one of the NIC's > and nearly double the speed. The difference is that it is on the PCI-E > bus and has MSI support. > > irq16: em0:irq0+ > irq17: em1:irq0 > irq20: hpet0 > irq258: mskc0 > > I have many network settings, but changing them did nothing. Here are > the settings I am trying now that seem to squeak a little extra > performance. The commented-out lines are ones I tried without seeing > any change. I have also tested without these settings. > > /boot/loader.conf > hw.em.rx_process_limit=3D"-1" > # dev.em.0.iflib.override_nrxds=3D"2048" > # dev.em.1.iflib.override_nrxds=3D"2048" > # dev.em.2.iflib.override_nrxds=3D"2048" > # dev.em.0.iflib.override_ntxds=3D"2048" > # net.link.ifqmaxlen=3D"2048" > hw.em.max_interrupt_rate=3D"32000" > # net.isr.maxthreads=3D"-1" > # net.isr.bindthreads=3D"1" > > /etc/sysctl.conf > kern.random.harvest.mask=3D351 > dev.em.0.fc=3D0 > dev.em.1.fc=3D0 > dev.em.0.itr=3D122 # Allow past 8000 interrupts/second. > dev.em.1.itr=3D122 > net.inet.ip.redirect=3D0 > net.inet6.ip6.redirect=3D0 > > Increasing these from 66 to 250 did not help: > hw.em.rx_abs_int_delay: 66 > hw.em.tx_abs_int_delay: 66 > hw.em.tx_int_delay: 66 > > I am utilizing pf, but I doubt it is the issue since using the same > rules with the msk driver would have held the speed down to 400Mb/s. > > Am I hitting the limit of the PCI bus (memory or interrupt) or something > else? I can buy a new PCI-E NIC for the internal network, but I rather > fully utilize the Intel NIC's I have, if possible. > > Sean > -- > scf@FreeBSD.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- "Well," Brahm=E0 said, "even after ten thousand explanations, a fool is no wiser, but an intelligent person requires only two thousand five hundred." - The Mah=E0bh=E0rata _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Nov 21 22:42:44 2020 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 904104727F0 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:42:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com) Received: from mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com (mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com [148.163.153.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.pphosted.com", Issuer "Thawte RSA CA 2018" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CdpMl5MT9z3km9 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:42:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com) Received: from pps.filterd (m0101316.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 0ALMeOGd013508 for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:42:42 -0500 Received: from nam10-mw2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-mw2nam10lp2100.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.55.100]) by mx0b-0017d602.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 34y0h8h260-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:42:42 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Krb3GbUvSLHmCa56HWerM6rtvgK1sblwUL0lx1xwSB563kgkmsD1dM3a4MqE1BF5Jr4vTbvCIcwzFbT5jo/IcNztO6tzvVoVWGW5ePfhzRDKlNsOjn0a0qoPmfuNwDQA7L0PiS5DbKOJpfQcP6RviPgHAlPMna/fy4xGNlFAm9LAbzBBH+tk7to+bPWsxpgDCAlXTqsdXE7dwcgM2w0ykFgiF/XZLqmOInG5mB/oF3UR0PE6QK2uwTgOS3zocr73zPZwTYEQofN5x9hIr7kGmH1r5m84XddFGudYBYbUVRdNX81mFezt/dU4+ejzo/wOS4yBVt3kcf1WD+PqajRZgA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=6y58v0WK1A8t1lTUc1DHpwBi1EWAQFKBpTOK1jQyDDc=; b=kBrdNmM2ML7G7JKVUyumji22we6eSMTRVu1dRl+x+GmH5mvM9KGntLgp/SMt94/apQPa+n84H0ATvPq1T5L2WmZLCaUUt3AVb9o5T129AfIT2W/PgpYcax30IbgthTs96o9Hiu/7h30fDooHTAj80Tva+kayofbxzYsHmiOu8nrpUkPTroWXwh5nkv5GwgipCbQBNDWbiEGvsbAVqBCt6SdDB2n2CJwC6axZ/MKH3teC3JmqREqC4He/vVz1P3Hf3IfqkicietCOvXq52HE08q0ONY53IQzoNcixMP4LAwrOPOJfVb2hOh03DXWK73m0EoUDvH+Ccf0oMkrV3E/5hQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lucera.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=lucera.com; dkim=pass header.d=lucera.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bgccs.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-bgccs-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=6y58v0WK1A8t1lTUc1DHpwBi1EWAQFKBpTOK1jQyDDc=; b=HHOWoC2N3PgAReRBuwRE46Jt/kQoVosGj1TGtEsiaokXJnbNHRuTUd5BLm1Rl6gFO1OUYNIJJrmXJhRU/x7uM8U01wF7Z6QZXTmcg3nHrx7u5aMMIzeF366E8ub3zeFgZjiJxUtK2yUSbs/g/IsC2eQ/mXWiE/rr4aNDp21zRfQ= Received: from BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:8d::29) by MN2PR12MB3965.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:168::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3589.21; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:42:38 +0000 Received: from BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ecf2:6e89:1581:11a]) by BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ecf2:6e89:1581:11a%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3564.035; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:42:38 +0000 From: "Saad, Mark" To: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" Subject: PF Question Thread-Topic: PF Question Thread-Index: AQHWwFXatOMGIQSGckCCD3e/4yuo1Q== Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:42:37 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [96.232.87.29] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: dc655545-af10-4345-bb80-08d88e6ebf94 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR12MB3965: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7219; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: eLwFSmuUlFm42FptF+EZAiVMta9RbZrLru/+y2iK2+G+0bLy6/lUyhs8oy0/av/4NXT5LNsG5SlYVbHHLQRwWD9ppgrZY7+zoWpQheM5e+ML5d9QqmhkIFrx/+jPfRBhjGQVmIeztE4yG1tGNynI0S7use2p7WqAaQgkZ4Qfg0FEjr/fQ0+ciX3H/qdCVYJVuRNTMmPRht8oM/xlgNPLh37HB/8PcEYgihgfJVYSrnG+3G45GSKBFMuc060MMvdSogrgJB9yU+StCC2qRk63vesjfnzKraaRCgmnFOUACN59kr0MQYRmSVIwy2941RLvKYAAZfrV8ePoxRsD7J8++A== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(39860400002)(136003)(396003)(346002)(376002)(7696005)(66476007)(71200400001)(2906002)(52536014)(6916009)(7116003)(478600001)(66446008)(64756008)(5660300002)(8936002)(3480700007)(9686003)(316002)(8676002)(26005)(4744005)(33656002)(66946007)(6506007)(55016002)(86362001)(186003)(76116006)(66556008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: lucera.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BL0PR12MB4756.namprd12.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: dc655545-af10-4345-bb80-08d88e6ebf94 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Nov 2020 22:42:37.9400 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: cfeb5f5e-839a-44b8-ab46-47157d8f1241 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: obqHRJyEB5MYhvlPTaCodi0GFeuSZVCScfBVaQEACNhqofnDTGL3if6tmEND9rhKA1jMKrpd80S9iiwk2eZ7lA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR12MB3965 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-11-21_04:2020-11-20, 2020-11-21 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=498 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011210159 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4CdpMl5MT9z3km9 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=bgccs.onmicrosoft.com header.s=selector1-bgccs-onmicrosoft-com header.b=HHOWoC2N; arc=pass (microsoft.com:s=arcselector9901:i=1); dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com designates 148.163.153.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.50 / 15.00]; HAS_XOIP(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:148.163.153.124]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[bgccs.onmicrosoft.com:+]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[148.163.153.124:from]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22843, ipnet:148.163.152.0/22, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[Mark.Saad@lucera.com,prvs=9594a43ac5=mark.saad@lucera.com]; ARC_ALLOW(-1.00)[microsoft.com:s=arcselector9901:i=1]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[bgccs.onmicrosoft.com:s=selector1-bgccs-onmicrosoft-com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[lucera.com]; FORGED_SENDER_VERP_SRS(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[148.163.153.124:from:127.0.2.255]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[148.163.153.124:from]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_ALL(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[148.163.153.124:from]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 22:42:44 -0000 Hi Net=0A= This is sort of an abstract question. When using pf to only preform nat d= o I need to have at least one=0A= rule ? Can I omit the boiler plate "scrub rule " ? Other then allowing fra= gments and other fun=0A= stuff to get passed would this have any other implications ?=0A= =0A= =0A= ---=0A= Mark Saad=0A= Lucera Financial Infrastructures, LLC=0A= msaad@lucera.com=0A= =0A= =0A=