Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 23:30:45 +0200 From: Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net> To: pyunyh@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: re0 not working at boot on -CURRENT Message-ID: <51E85E85.1040601@madpilot.net> In-Reply-To: <51DD9E15.7070609@madpilot.net> References: <51DC726D.6040601@madpilot.net> <20130710070431.GE2753@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <51DD9E15.7070609@madpilot.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/10/13 19:47, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 07/10/13 09:04, Yonghyeon PYUN wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:28:29PM +0200, Guido Falsi wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have a PC with an integrate re ethernet interface, pciconf identifies >>> it like this: >>> >>> re0@pci0:3:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x11c01734 chip=0x816810ec rev=0x07 >>> hdr=0x00 >>> >>> I'm running FreeBSD current r252261. >>> >>> As stated in the subject after boot the interface does not work >>> correctly. >>> >>> Using tcpdump on another host I noticed that packets (ICMP echo requests >>> for example) do get sent, and replies generated by the other host, but >>> the kernel does not seem to see them. Except that every now and then >>> some packet does get to the system. >>> >>> I'm seeing packet 7, 27, 47, 66, 86, 106, 125, 144, 164, 183 and so on >>> from a ping which has been running for some time. Just about one every >>> twenty. Some pattern is showing up. >>> >>> this is the output of ifconfig re0 after boot: >>> >>> re0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu >>> 1500 >>> >>> options=8209b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_MAGIC,LINKSTATE> >>> >>> ether 00:19:99:f8:d3:0b >>> inet 172.24.42.13 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 172.24.42.255 >>> inet6 fe80::219:99ff:fef8:d30b%re0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 >>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >>> media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>) >>> status: active >>> >>> If I just touch any interface flag with ifconfig, anyone, tso, -txcsum >>> -rxcsum, it starts working flawlessly. It keeps working also if I >>> perform the opposite operation with ifconfig afterwards, so it is not >>> the flag itself fixing it. >>> >>> This is an ifconfig after performing this exercise(it's the same, since >>> I disabled txcsum and reactivated it in this instance): >>> >>> re0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu >>> 1500 >>> >>> options=8209b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,WOL_MAGIC,LINKSTATE> >>> >>> ether 00:19:99:f8:d3:0b >>> inet 172.24.42.13 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 172.24.42.255 >>> inet6 fe80::219:99ff:fef8:d30b%re0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2 >>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> >>> media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>) >>> status: active >>> >>> I don't know much about FreeBSD network drivers so i can't make theories >>> about this. I hope someone has an idea what the problem could be. >>> >>> I'm available for any further information needed, test, experiment and >>> so on. >> >> Could you show me dmesg output(re(4) and rgephy(4) only)? > > re0: <RealTek 8168/8111 B/C/CP/D/DP/E/F PCIe Gigabit Ethernet> port > 0xd000-0xd0ff mem 0xf2104000-0xf2104fff,0xf2100000-0xf2103fff irq 17 at > device 0.0 on pci3 > re0: Using 1 MSI-X message > re0: turning off MSI enable bit. > re0: Chip rev. 0x2c800000 > re0: MAC rev. 0x00000000 > re0: Ethernet address: 00:19:99:f8:d3:0b > miibus0: <MII bus> on re0 > rgephy0: <RTL8169S/8110S/8211 1000BASE-T media interface> PHY 1 on miibus0 > rgephy0: none, 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 10baseT-FDX-flow, 100baseTX, > 100baseTX-FDX, 100baseTX-FDX-flow, 1000baseT, 1000baseT-master, > 1000baseT-FDX, 1000baseT-FDX-master, 1000baseT-FDX-flow, > 1000baseT-FDX-flow-master, auto, auto-flow > > Also, I'm loading this as a module, but, for as much as I know, this > should not make any difference. > > >> Did it ever work or you see the issue only on CURRENT? > > Never worked on this machine (I own it since the last days of February). > > I only installed current on it. If needed I can find time to test a > recent 9.x snapshot on it. Sorry for the delay. I tested with a 9.2 PRERELEASE snapshot and it shows the same behavior it shows on CURRENT. Any further tests or things I can do to help diagnose this problem? -- Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51E85E85.1040601>