From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 13 18:39:03 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3972F1065698 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:39:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [IPv6:2a01:170:102f::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC2D88FC2B for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:39:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0DIcjue011648; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:39:00 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o0DIcj3N011647; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:38:45 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:38:45 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <201001131838.o0DIcj3N011647@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-current User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/6.4-PRERELEASE-20080904 (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:39:01 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: bge(4), 5715S, IBM BladeCenter, no carrier 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: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:39:03 -0000 Hi, I've got problems with the bge(4) interfaces on certain blades installed within an IBM BladeCenter. AFAIK these are fiber PHYs connected to internal fiber-to-copper transceivers inside the blade chassis. Basically, the interfaces are recognized and attached, but I don't get a carrier detected. The hardware is ok, and there is indeed a gigabit switch connected to the ports (under Linux, the carrier is detected and the interfaces work fine). ifconfig output: bge0: flags=9843 metric 0 mtu 1500 options=9b ether 00:21:5e:4c:07:22 inet 10.2.13.42 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.2.13.255 media: Ethernet 1000baseT (none) status: no carrier Related pciconf -lv entries: pcib3@pci0:21:0:0: class=0x060400 card=0x00000000 chip=0x01031166 rev=0xb5 hdr=0x01 vendor = 'ServerWorks (Was: Reliance Computer Corp)' device = 'Broadcom dual gigabit, pci bridge (BCM5715)' class = bridge subclass = PCI-PCI bge0@pci0:22:4:0: class=0x020000 card=0x03671014 chip=0x167914e4 rev=0xa3 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Broadcom Corporation' device = 'NetXtreme 5715S Gigabit Ethernet' class = network subclass = ethernet (There are more interfaces; I list bge0 only for brevity.) Excerpt from dmesg -v: bge0: mem 0x97a00000-0x97a0ffff,0x97a10000-0x97a1ffff irq 24 at device 4.0 on pci22 bge0: Reserved 0x10000 bytes for rid 0x10 type 3 at 0x97a00000 bge0: attempting to allocate 1 MSI vectors (8 supported) msi: routing MSI IRQ 256 to local APIC 0 vector 56 bge0: using IRQ 256 for MSI bge0: CHIP ID 0x00009003; ASIC REV 0x09; CHIP REV 0x90; PCI-X bge0: bpf attached bge0: Ethernet address: 00:21:5e:4c:07:22 bge0: [MPSAFE] bge0: [ITHREAD] Actually this is an 8-stable snapshot from December, but with if_bge.c and if_bgereg.h from 9-current as of today, because I saw a bunch of commits to HEAD last week. (That's why I'm posting this to -current.) If there's anything else I can do to track this problem down, please let me know. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one?" -- Tom Cargil, C++ Journal