From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Jan 8 20:16:00 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D225EA66E05 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 20:16:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ricera10@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qg0-f45.google.com (mail-qg0-f45.google.com [209.85.192.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 909FB1C27; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 20:16:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ricera10@gmail.com) Received: by mail-qg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b35so231125487qge.0; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:16:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=PoMGHKQFmYU1kCkIs+FjbO5GMSliFMf+iX5sRagZ/ZM=; b=M6IcNYzRT34W87nuXLDrZYjtuLZ9iq1c9RQ6RLLFdZ/qivdj0dshUTdVkN4B1l1YO1 oI0ycXsU+p9jsjzMPr0aCnOg1T1fR8NxpDeE6KrNfkYaC/9FcfvG+ypx+p1sqvF94k8M OsjLECpLHVnbF1QyIpYoKqQS5MxVeIig9fma43rHyEP7z5KsmjCz+lvhxph5Akpw5n4T sF/7ReX/WUekZ9iBXW9StOEvYW22VrhzLdu9NboA0JBG66xFBm5zvLzkzItHxzjHMtPD 4PdVFPbcB+Egi+ZIDvu7BPLrA1yhxD/OJQxDSeG3hSq8q99Weka/dhnsz5BDC+bdG9CT 56PA== X-Received: by 10.140.39.179 with SMTP id v48mr146216672qgv.98.1452283729827; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:08:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qg0-f45.google.com (mail-qg0-f45.google.com. [209.85.192.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u197sm33041365qhb.13.2016.01.08.12.08.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:08:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b35so230974493qge.0; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:08:49 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.101.201 with SMTP id u67mr95211955qge.33.1452283729292; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 12:08:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20150915125618.0f752596@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <55F7FCB5.5090809@selasky.org> <2A35EA60C3C77D438915767F458D65688077F87B@ORSMSX111.amr.corp.intel.com> <20150917133509.6c87f5b6@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <20150917133712.0ffd01ee@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <55FC40CB.7090504@freebsd.org> <55FDA830.7030307@freebsd.org> <20150921105848.386d6ae0@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <20150922082323.6f861448@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <5601B591.6000005@freebsd.org> <20151002094721.1f890e19@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> <560EA859.2030500@freebsd.org> <20151005072355.5bbadc0b@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> In-Reply-To: <20151005072355.5bbadc0b@freyja.zeit4.iv.bundesimmobilien.de> From: Eric Joyner Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 20:08:39 +0000 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: CURRENT: net/igb broken To: "O. Hartmann" , Sean Bruno Cc: "Pieper, Jeffrey E" , Hans Petter Selasky , freebsd-current Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 20:16:01 -0000 Does your i210 now work with the reverted version of igb? I didn't get a chance to follow up on this earlier. Also, can you give us the device ID for the device? There are a couple versions of the i210 hardware. - Eric On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 10:23 PM O. Hartmann wrote: > On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 08:52:57 -0700 > Sean Bruno wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > > > > > On 10/02/15 00:47, O. Hartmann wrote: > > > On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 15:39:11 +0000 Eric Joyner > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Oliver, > > >> > > >> did you try Sean's suggestion? > > >> > > >> - Eric > > >> > > >> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 1:10 PM Sean Bruno > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > On 09/21/15 23:23, O. Hartmann wrote: > > >>>>> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 21:13:18 +0000 Eric Joyner > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> If you do a diff between r288057 and r287761, there are > > >>>>>> no differences between the sys/dev/e1000, sys/modules/em, > > >>>>>> and sys/modules/igb directories. Are you sure r287761 > > >>>>>> actually works? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I'm quite sure r287761 works (and r287762 doesn't), double > > >>>>> checked this this morning again. I also checked r288093 and > > >>>>> it is still not working. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The ensure that I'm not the culprit and stupid here: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I use a NanoBSD environment and the only thing that gets > > >>>>> exchanged, is the underlying OS/OS revision. The > > >>>>> configuration always stays the same. The base system for > > >>>>> all of my tests is built from a clean source - (deleted > > >>>>> obj/ dir, clean, fresh build into obj/ for every test I > > >>>>> ran). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I realised a funny thing. Playing around with > > >>>>> enabling/disabling TSO (I have been told that could be the > > >>>>> culprit in an earlier Email from this list) with the > > >>>>> commend sequence: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ifconfig igb1 down ifconfig igb1 -tso ifconfig igb1 up > > >>>>> ifconfig igb1 down ifconfig igb1 tso ifconfig igb1 up . . > > >>>>> . > > >>>>> > > >>>>> while a ping is pinging in the background a remote host > > >>>>> connected to that specific interface, the ping does work > > >>>>> for a while and dies then after a round trip of roughly 10 > > >>>>> - 20. I can reproduce this. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> is that observation of any help? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Regards, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> oh > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:58 AM O. Hartmann > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 11:23:44 -0700 Sean Bruno > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On 09/18/15 10:20, Eric Joyner wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> He has an i210 -- he would want to revert > > >>>>>>>>>> e1000_i210.[ch], too. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Sorry for the thrash Sean -- it sounds like it > > >>>>>>>>>> would be a good idea for you should revert this > > >>>>>>>>>> patch, and Jeff and I can go look at trying these > > >>>>>>>>>> shared code updates and igb changes internally > > >>>>>>>>>> again. We at Intel really could've done a better > > >>>>>>>>>> job of making sure these changes worked across a > > >>>>>>>>>> wider variety of devices. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> - Eric > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I've reverted the changes to head. I'll reopen the reviews > > >>>>> and we can proceed from there. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> sean > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:50 AM Sean Bruno > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> r287762 broke the system > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Before I revert this changeset *again* can you > > >>>>>>>>>> test revert r287762 from if_igb.c, e1000_82575.c > > >>>>>>>>>> and e1000_82575.h *only* > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> That narrows down the change quite a bit. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> sean > > [...] > > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > I'm now on r288057 on that specific machine, supposedly > > >>>>>>> reverted changes that seemingly has been identified as > > >>>>>>> the culprit. Still NO change in behaviour! > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> r287761 works with the same configuration on igb > > >>>>>>> (i210), any further does not. Not ping/connect from the > > >>>>>>> outside, no ping/connect from the inside. Tried > > >>>>>>> different protocols (SAMBA, ssh, LDAP, DNS). Affected > > >>>>>>> is/are only boxes with the igb driver and i210 chipset > > >>>>>>> (we do not have other chips covered by igb). > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Regards, Oliver > > [...] > > > > > > > For my entertainment (and HPS's), can you run HEAD and revert > > > r287775? > > > > > > sean > > [...] > > > > I did as suggested: > > > > > > checking out the most recent HEAD of CURRENT this morning, which > > > is/was for me r288474. I applied then "svn merge -c -287775 .", > > > which reverted(?) only r287775, which is something with > > > tcp_output.c or so. I did not remember. > > > > > > > Thanks. This is what I intended. > > > > > > > I recompiled a fresh world (cleaning up /usr/obj completely by > > > deleting the folder) and try running the target system with the > > > created image. > > > > > > Result: the same as >r287761, it doesn't work. I reverted back to > > > r287761, which works for me on the specific target hardware > > > (Fujitsu Primergy RX 1330 M1). > > > > > > > What's really confusing me is that I've reverted r287762 and you are > > still having problems. > > It is confusing me also. I'm about to walk through the commits to check > whether > there is another possibility of influence - say: changes in the way things > work > due to configuration et cetera. Due to the fact I use a NanoBSD image on > that > very specific system, the configuration always is the very same but the > underlying OS changes with the revision. > > An observation I made is also very strange: on most recent CURRENT > flapping the > state of the igb network interface by bringing it up and down repeatedly, > I get > sometimes, not always and reproducable, a connection - pings go through > for a > couple of pakets, but not more than 10 in the tests I ran so far. > > > > > Can you set bootverbose (boot_verbose="YES" in loader.conf) with the > > current version of -CURRENT and post the dmesg somewhere for me to > > look at? > > Yes, of course, but in worst case I can do this not before Wednesday since > we > have to perform some tests on that specific system today and Tuesday and > I'm > now with the working revision r287761. It's a bit complicated, die to the > fact > the system is isolated from the internet so far and I have to pull the > dmesg > and save it to a flash drive and this I have to do on-site, and I'm not > on-site > at the moment. > > > > > sean > > Oliver >