From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 7 05:10:48 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2584C2D for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 05:10:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-x22c.google.com (mail-pb0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 741601028 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 05:10:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id rq2so2746958pbb.31 for ; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 21:10:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Dn3yES2sO8PqTN/JmkJI+4WDVtA05/r5FmEGM7vjHVk=; b=CxwtwBPL4tiVPdWPe/oxxk/HFgBoHQcDtAXANy025+0RzElFCMVPCEEVkT32CgVxfu Di4lAPEZsGI+Ixu5moTJ5aLWMvL93X+l80eF1y6qM64SzpW4+PJzDKCfpKljKZMoZQAS QYvavleCwfgDqinoxXHwmIfsUQX/WsYcYoynpS4LKkzDHzN81fGsf93MAS8RNX1Sful4 gbkrhda3Pt7xO/sfw04MTobyI06f/MXAg5cXB/dMMHQcK1Ldvaw84vFSzDmgmvwA9JGM CAjFdmqMoYC3pSdiYS2dcG5JhPCNWvx8U859U4tIebOOgm/48kztw3KBzEZgPtedZXEg iSig== X-Received: by 10.68.203.135 with SMTP id kq7mr17136915pbc.85.1391749848050; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 21:10:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from pyunyh@gmail.com (lpe4.p59-icn.cdngp.net. [114.111.62.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id un5sm23641738pab.3.2014.02.06.21.10.44 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Feb 2014 21:10:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by pyunyh@gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 07 Feb 2014 14:10:40 +0900 From: Yonghyeon PYUN Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 14:10:40 +0900 To: Vitaly Magerya Subject: Re: Any news about "msk0 watchdog timeout" regression in 10-RELEASE? Message-ID: <20140207051040.GB1369@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <201401251935.s0PJZAwH048013@maildrop2.v6ds.occnc.com> <52E4159A.4020007@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52E4159A.4020007@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, curtis@ipv6.occnc.com X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: pyunyh@gmail.com List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 05:10:48 -0000 On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 09:50:50PM +0200, Vitaly Magerya wrote: > On 01/25/14 21:35, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > > When I'm no longer quite so swamped I'll look at this again. It seems > > we are the only two reporting this problem. > > To everyone reading this list: if you have an msk(4) NIC that doesn't > work on 10-RELEASE, now is the time to speak up. > > > Please send lines of these form from dmesg: > > > > mskc0: port 0xe800-0xe8ff > > mem 0xfebfc000-0xfebfffff irq 19 at deviceD 0.0 on pci2 > > > > msk0: > > on mskc0 > > > > That may indicate we have very similar chips. If not, this msk > > problem may be more widespread. > > Mine goes like this: > > mskc0: port 0x2000-0x20ff > mem 0xf0200000-0xf0203fff irq 18 at device 0.0 on pci9 > > msk0: > on mskc0 > > Pretty different chips it seems. Please try r261577.