Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 5 May 2011 01:20:30 -0400
From:      Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com>
To:        Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
Cc:        Olivier Smedts <olivier@gid0.org>, FreeBSD current mailing list <current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: problems with em(4) since update to driver 7.2.2
Message-ID:  <BANLkTinmKH40yx5Mgu9zgQ2qEF2O-n6HMQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin2j3QzO0pwVHe9Nm-L8otEf9pcbg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <BANLkTinrfZbO%2BMUDDuzsoaN1y-=_O8LgNA@mail.gmail.com> <4D94A354.9080903@sentex.net> <AANLkTik_XPsVWL-KqHkPic1KQ0SdCSk6u_9ykRefi3VE@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=K5ASG9TWLAh5r%2Bzo9Wy1stMf9WA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikPPzxZ6XRAaqrvdeXBp=Ydvz7hNg@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=rhZ0dyO6Zq13jY6-NKVE8n24YyQ@mail.gmail.com> <4DC07013.9070707@gmx.net> <BANLkTi=DmQsVvJOaoxMr5GPOLkjs7sdTxQ@mail.gmail.com> <4DC078BD.9080908@gmx.net> <BANLkTin1ykoo80%2B9iWe%2Bg5ib1DXw%2B05BgQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=STPT13-50dxMRgjLP_pyxL9Utyw@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikX8gs7Ln2KLZkA=MyieeCR%2BzKXzQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikj-wSOFWQX9Y_yN54Q_jk-=vD3LA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTin0ANtbWGv4CTr%2BO5xEL58hVRDefg@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikzpjxe%2BcMYiTRak0B0tnkhrW%2BBow@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikUJOD%2BtzYoiHCoWHrD36PxLQgN7A@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTin2j3QzO0pwVHe9Nm-L8otEf9pcbg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have had my validation engineer busy all day, we have tried both
> a 9 kernel as well as 8.2, =A0using the code from HEAD, and we
> cannot reproduce this problem.
>
Actually, it can be trivially reproduced by tainting `error'. As it is
uninitialized in HEAD, it's value can be _anything_, so let's mark it
as explicitly invalid.

diff -u ./if_em.c /data/src/freebsd/em-7.2.2/src/if_em.c
--- ./if_em.c   2011-02-18 01:18:23.000000000 -0500
+++ /data/src/freebsd/em-7.2.2/src/if_em.c      2011-05-05
01:12:01.000000000 -0400
@@ -3912,7 +3912,7 @@
        struct  adapter         *adapter =3D rxr->adapter;
        struct em_buffer        *rxbuf;
        bus_dma_segment_t       seg[1];
-       int                     i, j, nsegs, error;
+       int                     i, j, nsegs, error =3D -1;

The error pointed out in this thread pops up in the next boot.

 - Arnaud

> The data your netstat -m shows suggests to me that what's happening
> is somehow setup of the receive ring is running more than once maybe??
>
> You asked at one point how this could go into STABLE, well, because
> not only here at Intel, but at lots of external customers this code has b=
een
> used and tested thoroughly.
>
> I am not calling into question your problem, but until I understand what =
it
> is I cannot "fix" it :)
>
> The thing I am guessing right now is the culprit is the setup code, the
> reason
> is that when I ported to the igb driver I found that it did not work on o=
ur
> newer
> hardware, and so I went back to the older version of setup for igb. Now,
> even
> though I have not seen hardware fail with em, maybe there is some.
>
> To help me give me a complete pciconf -lv, and if its a namebrand system
> tell me that, including all hardware in it.
>
> If you like Olivier I can make a version of em for you that also reverts =
the
> setup code the way I did for igb, see if that fixes it for you?
>
> Thanks for your patience,
>
> Jack
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org=
"
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTinmKH40yx5Mgu9zgQ2qEF2O-n6HMQ>