From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 8 14:41:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123B016A4D0 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:41:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from quetzal@zone3000.net) Received: from mx1.sitevalley.com (sitevalley.com [209.67.60.43]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7655443DCC for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:40:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from quetzal@zone3000.net) Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (217.144.69.37) by 209.67.61.254 with SMTP; 8 Nov 2006 14:40:30 -0000 Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 16:40:03 +0200 From: Nikolay Pavlov To: Jack Vogel Message-ID: <20061108144003.GA43734@zone3000.net> Mail-Followup-To: Nikolay Pavlov , Jack Vogel , Adrian Chadd , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <68011C68-0962-4946-88E1-F36EE7C707DA@redstarling.com> <20061106221219.GA66676@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> <041201c701f9$37b2aed0$9603a8c0@claylaptop> <2a41acea0611061614n478efe77y82c0ebc2e1b01e19@mail.gmail.com> <2a41acea0611062242h42b1bde6w711e9a5039ed1a90@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2a41acea0611062242h42b1bde6w711e9a5039ed1a90@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p10 Cc: Adrian Chadd , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em driver testing X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 14:41:04 -0000 On Monday, 6 November 2006 at 22:42:18 -0800, Jack Vogel wrote: > On 11/6/06, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >Just out of curiousity - why wasn't the offending MPSAFE related > >changes to em just reverted after discovering the em instability? The > >driver -was- stable a couple of months ago, no? > > Actually it was not. Some reports have cited problems back > to 6.0 or before. Well i have 5.5 box with very similar symptomatic :) I do not see watchdog timeouts on it, but a lot of UP/DOWN events. > > The watchdog design was fundamentally flawed from an SMP > point of view and needed to be changed. > > We also didnt want to go backwards if possible. My Intel driver > had support for new hardware that was good to pick up. > > There's lots of new stuff coming too, so stay tuned :) After 48 hours of production running there is no watchdog timeouts on my 6.2 SMP server with your patch. Thanks for all who working on this. > > Jack > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- ====================================================================== - Best regards, Nikolay Pavlov. <<<----------------------------------- ======================================================================