From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 7 10:02:07 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D382D877 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:02:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com) Received: from mail3.transactionware.com (mail3.transactionware.com [202.68.173.211]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 06C6E2395 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24912 invoked by uid 907); 7 Oct 2013 10:02:03 -0000 Received: from eth222.nsw.adsl.internode.on.net (HELO [192.168.1.53]) (150.101.196.221) (smtp-auth username janm, mechanism plain) by mail3.transactionware.com (qpsmtpd/0.84) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPSA; Mon, 07 Oct 2013 21:02:03 +1100 Subject: Re: Device timeout from mfi(9) while booting 9.2-RELEASE Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1812\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 From: Jan Mikkelsen X-Priority: 3 In-Reply-To: <5A58E4C49C3D42B0AFADC2B7C4D4B013@multiplay.co.uk> Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 21:02:01 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3A102078-B6D7-4404-9BC7-934772D326D7@transactionware.com> References: <20131003194704.GG41229@kib.kiev.ua> <20131004052457.GN41229@kib.kiev.ua> <24C7E2F8EDAF40439C076C03B8A0E203@multiplay.co.uk> <1380902373.2621.12.camel@localhost> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D720FC2F488@LTCFISWMSGMB21.FNFIS.com> <2F782A12-C6C0-46F0-849E-935ED4B007BA@transactionware.com> <0370DB3A3A804CB48C862133FC053836@multiplay.co.uk> <79021054-40E5-40C6-89E1-4483709A8574@transactionware.com> <5A58E4C49C3D42B0AFADC2B7C4D4B013@multiplay.co.uk> To: Steven Hartland X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1812) Cc: Konstantin Belousov , Ryan Stone , "" , "Teske, Devin" X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 10:02:08 -0000 On 7 Oct 2013, at 8:06 pm, Steven Hartland = wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Mikkelsen" = > .. >=20 >> Just to confirm when you say fine, have you checked to ensure none >> are reporting timeouts? >=20 >> Yes. >> Only the first two of these are from a 9.2 era system (also the ones >> with the most recent firmware). >> We did have timeout issues while testing this platform which were >> resolved by taking the mfi driver from -HEAD at the time and setting >> hw.mfi.msi=3D1. The oldest ones have been running for over two years. >=20 > Thats curious, hw.mfi.msi=3D1 is the default so you shouldn't need to > change this. >=20 > Also heads mfi is almost identical to 9.2 so not sure why you would > need to update, could you clarify? The 9.2 system has the 9.2 driver and was not updated. It is a test = system with a 9261-8i and a 9240-4i. The other machines are running 9.0 or 9.1 with a modified driver. The = 9.0 systems have a patch that added the hw.mfi.msi sysctl with a default = of zero. I just went back to our Perforce depot and checked the timing; = that patch was applied to our local copy on 2011-12-08. My =93running = for over two years=94 was wrong, it is actually about a year and a half. = At that point the 9261-8i was stable and we saw no further timeout = errors even with the old firmware versions in my email. (looking through = svn, this change was in rev 227562 to mfi_pci.c.) The loader.conf entry has been in our standard builds ever since, and = even after the default value changed. Probably time to remove it. We started using the 9240-4i/8i in May 2012. We brought in changes from = head mfi to support them. I=92d need to go digging deeper to see exactly = what the changes were. A quick look shows that this is when the = hw.mfi.msi default changed in our copy of the code. In any case: These system are running and we don=92t see timeout errors = with the firmware versions I listed. There were also your later changes that improved the reliability of mfi. = We brought those back into our 9.1 based systems, but the cards were = working before those changes. Regards, Jan.