From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 8 18:49:07 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25EFB6D for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 18:49:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from artemb@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ve0-f182.google.com (mail-ve0-f182.google.com [209.85.128.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7796E8DA for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 18:49:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f182.google.com with SMTP id ox1so3628150veb.27 for ; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:49:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=sdelzcUGXoGeOwZjo2T0XAkAm8zxxQ8MYKhYu5vcjn0=; b=RctkPMkoczsl48QYzBqQFvxZ+pSX/Z+yvlHK0CfZexbvTtxX696qKH2LbVLVcME+i0 ALDyH6+0c1lXaPZWJSI6k0doNH+cVCqL3rdeowEt6Wy3lEHbVgOK5r0rkexQSpMeyZ0A C1/Ae95mUK8o+389A/mIccLvtEEa5lEbV3igvLNJFOAvsKJB5/F8gSJbR9sX98fN/T1G 65EHyNwDzbNYe4vO/krrKwuw5NRi82jxLTDU9lOGfxI6/43n/lq7bkiny2cU8zUnfiZN JpnB08+s6I2Np4HlcwVe0kQuvlymbNheD+edPu1TdWNVYKfexpej1E2obzCYABtPQNNG 6/kQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.18.235 with SMTP id z11mr7105043vdd.39.1360349341166; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:49:01 -0800 (PST) Sender: artemb@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.123.2 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:49:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:49:01 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: yPBFtuQaeMYmdPZp4JNJHku7HOg Message-ID: Subject: Re: Intel 82574 issue reported on Slashdot From: Artem Belevich To: Jack Vogel , FreeBSD Net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 18:49:07 -0000 Jack, How do I tell whether my motherboards are made by 'specific manufacturer' and whether NICs there are affected? Broadcasting packet of death is not a very good method in production environment. EEPROM dump on my 82574L NICs on Supermicro X9SAE-V motherboard do match the 'bad' EEPROM mentioned in the http://www.kriskinc.com/intel-pod --Artem On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Jack Vogel wrote: > For those that may have run across the story on Slashdot about this NIC, > here is our statement: > > Recently there were a few stories published, based on a blog post by an > end-user, suggesting specific network packets may cause the Intel=AE 8257= 4L > Gigabit Ethernet Controller to become unresponsive until corrected by a > full platform power cycle. > > Intel was made aware of this issue in September 2012 by the blogs author. > Intel worked with the author as well as the original motherboard > manufacturer to investigate and determine root cause. Intel root caused t= he > issue to the specific vendor=92s mother board design where an incorrect > EEPROM image was programmed during manufacturing. We communicated the > findings and recommended corrections to the motherboard manufacturer. > > It is Intel=92s belief that this is an implementation issue isolated to a > specific manufacturer, not a design problem with the Intel 82574L Gigabit > Ethernet controller. Intel has not observed this issue with any > implementations which follow Intel=92s published design guidelines. Inte= l > recommends contacting your motherboard manufacturer if you have continued > concerns or questions whether your products are impacted. > Here is the link: > > http://communities.intel.com/community/wired/blog/2013/02/07/intel-82574l= -gigabit-ethernet-controller-statement > > Any questions or concerns may be sent to me. > > Cheers, > > 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"