Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 09:14:49 -0500 From: Guy Helmer <guy.helmer@gmail.com> To: Marcelo Gondim <gondim@bsdinfo.com.br> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 9.3 - Intel X520-SR2 stops passing packets Message-ID: <1FB15FA4-6185-4206-9517-AE9667A1A57C@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5564852D.8040008@bsdinfo.com.br> References: <C8B78CF4-184C-4BFE-B848-37A91A3B696B@gmail.com> <5560C395.8020807@farrokhi.net> <5564852D.8040008@bsdinfo.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On May 26, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Marcelo Gondim <gondim@bsdinfo.com.br> = wrote: >=20 > On 23-05-2015 15:14, Babak Farrokhi wrote: >> Look at the interrupts per queue. 500,000 is the maximum and it is = the >> reason your interface is not accepting new packets. >>=20 >>> Guy Helmer <mailto:guy.helmer@gmail.com> >>> May 21, 2015 at 6:03 PM >>> I=E2=80=99ve noticed that there have been reports of problems with = Intel >>> X520-SR2 network interfaces stopping working. I think I=E2=80=99m = seeing a >>> similar issue where the 10Gb interfaces stop receiving traffic >>> (they=E2=80=99re being used in promiscuous mode to sniff traffic = from a tap). >>> ifconfig shows the interfaces are still active and the links are OK. >>> ifconfig down/up restores activity. I=E2=80=99ve changed >>> hw.intr_storm_threshold=3D8000 but I couldn=E2=80=99t tell if the = interrupt >>> storm threshold had been triggered at the time the interfaces = stopped >>> passing traffic. >>>=20 >>> Output from sysctl: >>>=20 >>> . . . >>=20 > Hi, >=20 > I had this problem and one day updated the system 10.1- RELEASE to = 10.1- STABLE and the problem stopped. I was one years with this problem = and a script running and testing the interface when the interface = stopped working I was doing exactly what you did. Today I no longer have = that problem anymore. >=20 > I'm using 10.1-STABLE r281235 Thanks for the indication of success with 10.1-STABLE. I am locked into = using FreeBSD 9.x until I can go through the whole integration and = acceptance testing cycle for 10.x, so I=E2=80=99m trying to find a = solution that works on in 9.x. I have reviewed the diffs between 9.3 and = 10.1-STABLE for ixgbe driver and haven=E2=80=99t noticed anything that = stands out. Regards, Guy=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1FB15FA4-6185-4206-9517-AE9667A1A57C>