From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 12 15:46:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D8F16A407 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:46:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.176]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E8343D60 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:46:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id o67so2529229pye for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:46:31 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=gOQeA/6CTtienk3vzs5EKZ4mCgrYp86MEeIeCxSdjI+ML2p+prN048lgnlkZHx3v7mqDr4zymiusPz21BHqTA4m+5anEoMZGwHBjdUaCILco407+pLVOpomyjbh8KJVuAjL8Hj/x+vfaRxgDPWoWnErhCWKW+Ouin1tjXEZWass= Received: by 10.35.114.16 with SMTP id r16mr11738246pym; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:46:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.119.1 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:46:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2a41acea0609120846i32fd682wd834e0373c23d557@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:46:30 -0700 From: "Jack Vogel" To: "Andre Oppermann" In-Reply-To: <4506BE2C.1050903@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4506BE2C.1050903@freebsd.org> Cc: Ian FREISLICH , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TSO, SMP and the em driver. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:46:43 -0000 On 9/12/06, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > Hi > > > > I've noticed that after an apparently random period of time something > > goes wierd with my networking. A tcpdump shows traffic is recieved, > > but trussing a daemon (sshd for instance) shows the packets are not > > making it that far. Also, no packets are transmitted either. > > > > Here's an ifconfig of the interface while it doesn't transmit or > > recieve packets, note the OACTIVE: > > OACTIVE means the interface is stuck. This looks like a bug in the > em(4) driver. I've copied Jack Vogel, the driver maintainer from Intel, > into this email. > > -- > Andre > > > em0: flags=8c43 mtu 1500 > > options=3cb > > inet 41.204.193.40 netmask 0xfffffff0 broadcast 41.204.193.47 > > ether 00:04:23:d4:12:2e > > media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) > > status: active > > > > If I disable and re-enable TSO, the interface cames back, but > > probably because of an interface reset. It comes back without the > > OACTIVE flag and then all works well for some time. > > > > Here's the pciconf output for the ethernet device. > > > > em0@pci3:4:0: class=0x020000 card=0x10798086 chip=0x10798086 rev=0x03 hdr=0x00 > > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > > device = '82546EB Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet Controller' > > class = network > > subclass = ethernet > > > > So far, it hasn't happened again with TSO disabled over a period > > where it happened twice. Let me know if there's any debugging I > > can do for you. Interestingly, I have 4 more of these dual NICs > > running on the same version of the source without ony problems, but > > the working cards are on UP machines. Hmm, so if memory serves Linux disallows TSO when you are only at 100Mb, I dont recall why, I will have to look into that and perhaps have that same limitation in our driver. Any other data you can give me? Cheers, Jack