Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 23:24:09 +0100 From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> To: Claude Marinier <claude.marinier@cae.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: em3 no carrier Message-ID: <D711A5E9-82F8-4495-9C5F-BF72BF0BD4D3@lurchi.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <34E38D657499684D9EBAA6D73CD2D1E21958EE4A62@CAEMEX81.caecorp.cae.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Dec 17, 2013, at 10:51 PM, Claude Marinier <claude.marinier@cae.com> wrote: > >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Rodrigo Osorio [mailto:rodrigo at bebik.net] >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:40 AM >>> To: Claude Marinier >>> Cc: freebsd-net at freebsd.org >>> Subject: Re: em3 no carrier >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Can you give us more informations about the network card / chips ? >>> Did you found any error in /var/log/ ? >>> >>> - rodrigo >> >> My apologies, I missed that bit of information. >> >> Yes, there is an error in /var/log/messages. >> >> Dec 17 11:33:07 WANemu bird: OSPF: Socket error on em3: No buffer space available >> Dec 17 11:33:47 WANemu last message repeated 4 times >> Dec 17 11:35:57 WANemu last message repeated 13 times >> Dec 17 11:45:57 WANemu last message repeated 60 times >> Dec 17 11:55:47 WANemu last message repeated 59 times >> >> >> Also note that the HP NC364T uses an Intel 82571EB chipset. >> >>> On 17/12/13 11:27 -0500, Claude Marinier wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> This is a WAN emulator (ipfw, DummyNet, and BIRD). FreeBSD 9.2 >>>> Release (amd64) is running on DL360 G5 with a new NC364T quad-port >>>> Ethernet NIC. I installed the new NIC yesterday. The four ports >>>> are connected to routers in a lab. >>>> >>>> FreeBSD WAMemu 9.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE #0 r255898: Thu Sep 26 22:50:31 UTC 2013 >>>> root at bake.isc.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 >>>> >>>> Dec 16 17:13:19 WANemu kernel: em3: <Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.3.8> >>>> port 0x6020-0x603f mem 0xfdee0000-0xfdefffff,0xfde00000-0xfde7ffff irq 17 at >>>> device 0.1 on pci22 Dec 16 17:13:19 >>>> WANemu kernel: em3: Using an MSI interrupt Dec 16 17:13:19 >>>> WANemu kernel: em3: Ethernet address: e8:39:35:13:21:6e >>>> >>>> The four em interfaces are configured the same way (lines in rc.conf >>>> are identical except for IP address. >>>> >>>> ifconfig_em3="inet x.y.113.197/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" >>>> ifconfig_em0="inet x.y.113.14/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" >>>> ifconfig_em2="inet x.y.113.109/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" >>>> ifconfig_em1="inet x.y.113.189/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" >>>> >>>> The GE 0/1 port on the Cisco 2821 shows no link and ifconfig shows "no >>>> carrier" for em3. Oddly, it also shows autoselect. >>>> >>>> em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 >>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO> >>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6d >>>> inet x.y.113.14 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast x.y.113.15 >>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216d%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 >>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex> >>>> status: active >>>> em1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 >>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO> >>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6c >>>> inet x.y.113.189 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast x.y.113.191 >>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216c%em1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 >>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex> >>>> status: active >>>> em2: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 >>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO> >>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6f >>>> inet 131.140.113.109 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast 131.140.113.111 >>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216f%em2 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3 >>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex> >>>> status: active >>>> em3: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 >>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO> >>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6e >>>> inet 131.140.113.197 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast 131.140.113.199 >>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216e%em3 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4 >>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex> (autoselect) >>>> status: no carrier >>>> >>>> I have tried three Ethernet cables with no difference. This morning, >>>> I briefly booted Puppy Linux from USB and manually configured the four >>>> Ethernet interfaces. They all work (ping good to all four routers); >>>> the Cisco on em3 shows happy lights. I then booted back into FreeBSD, >>>> the problem with em3 remains. I have not had any success searching with >>>> Google; I may not have used suitable search terms. >>>> >>>> One more odd symptom: bmon has trouble with these interfaces. >>>> >>>> em0è95^S!m on WANemu >>>> Name >>>> qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq >>>> WANemu (local) >>>> 0 em0è95^S!m >>>> 1 em1è95^S!l >>>> 2 em2è95^S!o >>>> 3 em3è95^S!n >>>> 4 usbus0 >>>> 5 usbus1 >>>> 6 usbus2 >>>> 7 usbus3 >>>> 8 usbus4 >>>> 9 usbus5 >>>> 10 ipfw0 >>>> 11 lo0 >>>> >>>> It looks like FreeBSD is somehow mishandling these interfaces. Before >>>> purchasing it, I searched with Google and found reports of people using >>>> this device without problems. I do not know how to proceed. >>>> >>>> Thank you for your help. > > Oddly, replacing em3 with bce1 left the system with only two functionning > interfaces. The order of the interface definitions in rc.local makes > a difference. The worst order is bce1, em0, em2, em1 which left only > em0 and em2 working. Changing the order to bce1, em0, em1, em2 allows > the three 'em' interfaces to work. In both, bce1 is not working (no > carrier). Changing the order to em0, em1, em2, bce1 did not improve > the situation. > > This is a WAN emulator and the rc.conf definitions are generated by the > configuration program from site names, hence the odd order. I am changing > the order manually. > > I have reconfigured the Cisco router to use G0/0 instead of G0/1. This > has made no noticeable difference. Did you configure it to 100MBit, full-duplex? Best regards Michael > > Does anyone know how to order the definitions? > > -- > C Marinier > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D711A5E9-82F8-4495-9C5F-BF72BF0BD4D3>