From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 22 05:06:44 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF5016A4C9 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:06:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE8313C465 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:06:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o2so889290uge for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:06:42 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=YLLboNdM/H3S+SNKzvGyuaXXI8YBUcnE2dYvD/DYpAXfqKl6tB+3KCu/oBO2M5QXSmeBkq6jIsSLhy4N3u6/m0ux43GhTxndoxmkntQWGhDg4dp0OqK9l9yv+WX8mf78CMcs7c1N5oScc8EOrwMQJcCAOBqsYhoNneZGC5xrrWM= Received: by 10.82.107.15 with SMTP id f15mr5924240buc.1169442402128; Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:06:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.127.12 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:06:42 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2a41acea0701212106t31b5478di8817cfda25637945@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:06:42 -0800 From: "Jack Vogel" To: "Scott Long" In-Reply-To: <45B3A821.3060605@samsco.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <2a41acea0701191055u20b91c84tfabb242c9b6815fd@mail.gmail.com> <200701201041.10752.jhb@freebsd.org> <2a41acea0701201356u53dbbd94m877d4e46615d0b2f@mail.gmail.com> <45B292AB.7050503@samsco.org> <2a41acea0701201410m3ce52c0y7942182b9403037d@mail.gmail.com> <45B3A821.3060605@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Mark Atkinson Subject: Re: another msi blacklist candidate? 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: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:06:44 -0000 On 1/21/07, Scott Long wrote: > Jack Vogel wrote: > > On 1/20/07, Scott Long wrote: > >> Jack Vogel wrote: > >> > On 1/20/07, John Baldwin wrote: > >> >> On Friday 19 January 2007 13:55, Jack Vogel wrote: > >> >> > On 1/19/07, Mark Atkinson wrote: > >> >> > > I upgraded a box to -current yesterday with the following pci card > >> >> in it, > >> >> > > (this is the msi disabled verbose boot below) but upon bootup, any > >> >> heavy > >> >> > > network activity caused watchdog timeouts and resets. Disabling > >> >> msi via > >> >> > > the two tunables fixed the problem. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > What info do you need on this problem? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > found-> vendor=0x8086, dev=0x1076, revid=0x00 > >> >> > > bus=4, slot=2, func=0 > >> >> > > class=02-00-00, hdrtype=0x00, mfdev=0 > >> >> > > cmdreg=0x0117, statreg=0x0230, cachelnsz=16 (dwords) > >> >> > > lattimer=0x40 (1920 ns), mingnt=0xff (63750 ns), > >> >> maxlat=0x00 (0 ns) > >> >> > > intpin=a, irq=10 > >> >> > > powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > >> >> > > MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit > >> >> > > map[10]: type 1, range 32, base 0xdf9c0000, size 17, > >> enabled > >> >> > > pcib4: requested memory range 0xdf9c0000-0xdf9dffff: good > >> >> > > map[14]: type 1, range 32, base 0xdf9e0000, size 17, > >> enabled > >> >> > > pcib4: requested memory range 0xdf9e0000-0xdf9fffff: good > >> >> > > map[18]: type 4, range 32, base 0xdcc0, size 6, enabled > >> >> > > pcib4: requested I/O range 0xdcc0-0xdcff: in range > >> >> > > pcib4: matched entry for 4.2.INTA > >> >> > > pcib4: slot 2 INTA hardwired to IRQ 18 > >> >> > > em0: port > >> >> > > 0xdcc0-0xdcff m > >> >> > > em 0xdf9c0000-0xdf9dffff,0xdf9e0000-0xdf9fffff irq 18 at device > >> >> 2.0 on pci4 > >> >> > > em0: Reserved 0x20000 bytes for rid 0x10 type 3 at 0xdf9c0000 > >> >> > > em0: Reserved 0x40 bytes for rid 0x18 type 4 at 0xdcc0 > >> >> > > em0: bpf attached > >> >> > > em0: Ethernet address: 00:0e:0c:6e:a1:39 > >> >> > > em0: [FAST] > >> >> > > >> >> > Talked about this internally, and the advise here is that the em > >> >> driver change > >> >> > so that only PCI-E adapters can use MSI, this would eliminate the > >> >> need to > >> >> > blacklist in the kernel PCI code. > >> >> > >> >> It's not em(4) that is the problem, but the system, and I'd rather we > >> >> fix it > >> >> generically rather than in each driver. Maybe we should disable MSI > >> >> for non-PCIe > >> >> systems? > >> > > >> > Depends what that means, say a system HAS PCI-E, but also a PCI and/or > >> > a PCI-X slot will MSI be unavailable in those slots, that's what I > >> would > >> > prefer. > >> > > >> > Jack > >> > >> Are you saying that MSI should only be available to PCIe devices? That > >> will break legitimate PCI-X devices. > > > > True, the question is how many of those devices are problematic and need > > blacklisting anyway? I don't have a feel for this, do you Scott? > > > > Jack > > It's up to the driver writers to keep tabs on their peripherals. If the > Intel 12345 PCI-X NIC can't do MSI but the Intel 23456 PCI-X NIC can, > then it's up to the driver to know that. Chipset support is the > responsibility of the OS, and that's where it gets more difficult > because MSI is still fairly immature on the x86/x64 platform. > > Scott > LOL, this conversation started because I said I was going to disallow some adapters from MSI and John said it should be in the OS not all the drivers :) I'm happy to do it the way I planned at first anyway :) Jack