From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 8 17:23:34 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 508DF106564A for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:23:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f54.google.com (mail-ww0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D34EF8FC12 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:23:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwb24 with SMTP id 24so423077wwb.13 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:23:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=v3PszHMVFhln7U2wXE+AcEOJTUJj6jgyckGdGeQ2uv4=; b=FT+bg9J+58edqdBGfwXiGwbnCVjoKVyvujbY3aaC/DLrEbi+ukQToI9wIhaOIMrs3n vOxv2xlI9ekLTaHjlm8Q/zp4TS9RhMBTciXSaIu/z2GFcTVyxL47lWgU4ouDWBCxaV1v im+swiwrax4Z9COoRnHewGFaenldWBNowQdg4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=R/7UeH6kIBi7d+sIYerytpiDfRuf3s8/R6WWR+WkFcyhMIQKAA9rk1bCMfqRuHIYG0 IZlnrgJsleT7B3WWfBG0zs14/NpYNbuPOd3P1Io/V+F7tO6rqz2+hl9JP85tBQv1Y2Ao d0zPSfeD5oQmsEajBzkaqWcd9iURlOQJSGgSI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.11.8 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:23:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201004081313.o38DD4JM041821@lava.sentex.ca> <201004081320.o38DKVX7041854@lava.sentex.ca> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:23:32 -0700 Received: by 10.216.87.75 with SMTP id x53mr191844wee.144.1270747412728; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Jack Vogel To: Brandon Gooch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em driver regression 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: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 17:23:34 -0000 On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Brandon Gooch wrote: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Jack Vogel wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Brandon Gooch < > jamesbrandongooch@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Jack Vogel wrote: > >> > Mike, I noticed this connection is only 100Mb, that isn't accidental? > >> > And, > >> > is it possible for > >> > you to check a connection at 1Gb and see if the watchdogs don't > happen. > >> > > >> > My test engineer is running this code, and we are having trouble > >> > repro'ing > >> > the issue, so any > >> > clues might help. Is the kernel 64 or 32 bit? > >> > > >> > Jack > >> > > >> > >> Not to butt in or anything... > > > > Not butting in :) OK, so this all looks fine or am I missing something? > > > > Jack > > > > This is the dmesg from the system exhibiting the "ip length 328 > disagrees with bytes received 332" while attempting to obtain a lease > on the two DHCP-enabled VLANs, and also manifests in the VirtualBox > bridged networking guests. > > I can honestly say that other than the output from dhclient and the > VirtualBox issue, I might not have noticed problems otherwise. > > For instance, I have a VLAN interface configured to connect to an > "outside" LAN segment and I'm running sshd on that interfaces IP > address (using the new multiple routing table feature as well). I was > able to connect to the sshd instance as usual, and I can make > connections out as in: > > # setfib 4 ping google.com > > ...things seemed OK. Until VirtualBox. Then I started paying attention > to messages scrolling by as my machine booted and saw the dhclient "ip > length" thing (just as Mike Tancsa had) and thought, "It must be the > new em(4) driver". > > That's my story :) > > I don't know what chip my em(4) device is, how can I check that? Also, > would some type of traffic capture help in this case? > > -Brandon > > pciconf -l will show us. my tester is having trouble reproducing this, but I dont think he is using vlans, that must be the missing ingredient. The disagreement in size is 4 bytes, just the size of the CRC coincidentally, but I dont have it set to strip, hmmmm. I may have some code for you to try shortly, stay tuned. Jack