From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan  5 10:34:47 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2EAD816A4CE; Mon,  5 Jan 2004 10:34:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 05A7743D2D; Mon,  5 Jan 2004 10:34:46 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mux@freebsd.org)
Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1920)
	id F35F05C7FA; Mon,  5 Jan 2004 10:34:45 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:34:45 +0100
From: Maxime Henrion <mux@freebsd.org>
To: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20040105183445.GK2060@elvis.mu.org>
References: <200401041115.29188.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si>
	<200401042151.i04Lp27E009737@gw.catspoiler.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200401042151.i04Lp27E009737@gw.catspoiler.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: 5.2-RC oerrs and collisions on dc0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:34:47 -0000

Don Lewis wrote:
> I just took a closer look at the busdma diff, and this change to
> dc_txeof() looks very suspicious:
> 
> @@ -2663,7 +2809,7 @@
>                 if (txstat & DC_TXSTAT_OWN)
>                         break;
>  
> -               if (!(cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_LASTFRAG) ||
> +               if (!(cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_FIRSTFRAG) ||
>                     cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_SETUP) {
>                         if (cur_tx->dc_ctl & DC_TXCTL_SETUP) {
>                                 /*
> 
> The code in the "if" block ends with a "continue" which will cause the
> error handling code to be skipped if the "if" condition is true.  I'm
> pretty sure that the error status bits are only set in the last
> descriptor for the frame, so we want to execute the "continue" unless
> the DC_TXCTL_LASTFRAG bit is set.
> 
> Try reverting this part of the busdma change.

I think you actually found the culprit, though fixing this is not as
simple as reverting this line.  I changed the check to
DC_TXCTL_FIRSTFRAG because that's the descriptor which will have a link
to the mbuf, while it was previously done for the LASTFRAG descriptor.
However, I didn't think about the code flow enough it seems.  If you
don't have a fix for this soon, I should be able to do it pretty easily,
assuming I find the time.

Thanks,
Maxime