From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 31 22:41:57 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D201065679; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:41:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F3D8FC19; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:41:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11so1365588vws.13 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:41:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:date:to:cc :subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=U97vQe6h76e08l9yMAEUxMTYEnv6Zaf/YXLSL69QJ3U=; b=EDujsp0/V7gPlJwy2/moLsU9fNtxLnLGqStOiMPcxkieRLEOkzYI0aF+E1JKlNFBjk IoJnWirDw7FagNlh4PInCtqt0UFu+VUL44EC7GGnUJxoF25ACu5CMkdPRYdHJImwluLv 9so7Qbdj7eA8VR84/zcfoPiYTS7ANh0+JUaJM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=bxpPGSbz9qV/ppfTx7rfMAOVRTpHCbbwhQmbMOeDhykH8ICnL47D+LGrQpoK66yt5L QpF4BzXMnud/mH1oV/XGAqBkdHhBYYZcqpn5qIHdTpZeFpmICqEnK3GKJr6WGxOmsSIe Iw6CKQopCsnwdU1ceDahKe0TrrQN6fdszBWY8= Received: by 10.220.124.25 with SMTP id s25mr4477575vcr.68.1264977716290; Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:41:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from pyunyh@gmail.com ([174.35.1.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 42sm52552969vws.8.2010.01.31.14.41.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:41:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by pyunyh@gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:40:33 -0800 From: Pyun YongHyeon Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:40:33 -0800 To: Nick Rogers Message-ID: <20100131224033.GA1107@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <147432021001310037n1b67f01bx4b4e8781321cea8@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <147432021001310037n1b67f01bx4b4e8781321cea8@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: jfv@FreeBSD.org, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em(4) + ALTQ broken X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:41:58 -0000 --5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:37:43AM -0800, Nick Rogers wrote: > I'm having problems getting PF + ALTQ to work on em(4) interfaces under > 8.0-RELEASE. Kernel was rebuilt with the additional options necessary for > ALTQ and what not. Same basic configuration works fine under 7.2-RELEASE. > Basically, the queues create successfully but running a pfctl -vsq shows a > zero packet/byte count for all queues, even the interface's root queues. > > This same problem is mentioned in PR kern/138392, and the following forum > thread... > http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=6656 > > em(4)/e1000 driver from CURRENT does not fix the problem. Building an > 8.0-RELEASE kernel with the em(4) driver from 7.2-RELEASE fixes the problem > (i.e., replacing sys/dev/e1000 with that from 7.2). > > One of the machines im experiencing this on has the following intel > chipset... > > [user@foo ~]$ sysctl dev.em.0 > dev.em.0.%desc: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 6.9.6 > dev.em.0.%driver: em > dev.em.0.%location: slot=0 function=0 > dev.em.0.%pnpinfo: vendor=0x8086 device=0x10d3 subvendor=0x15d9 > subdevice=0x040d class=0x020000 > dev.em.0.%parent: pci3 > dev.em.0.debug: -1 > dev.em.0.stats: -1 > dev.em.0.rx_int_delay: 0 > dev.em.0.tx_int_delay: 66 > dev.em.0.rx_abs_int_delay: 66 > dev.em.0.tx_abs_int_delay: 66 > dev.em.0.rx_processing_limit: 100 > > Is this issue receiving any attention? I ask because one of the em(4) driver > contributors mentioned he had not heard of this problem in a recent thread > regarding a different em(4) bug, and this is a pretty serious problem for me > as I have many devices in production that need to be upgraded to 8.0, all > running Intel interfaces and relying on ALTQ. > > I appreciate any updates or information and would be happy to test any > patches and/or provide more information. Thanks. > _______________________________________________ I guess the problem comes from multi-queue support. The drbr interface is implemented with inline function so em(4)/igb(4) may have to define ALTQ to the header. I have not tested the patch(no time at this moment) but would you give it try? Thanks. --5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="em_igb_altq.patch" Index: sys/dev/e1000/if_igb.c =================================================================== --- sys/dev/e1000/if_igb.c (revision 203324) +++ sys/dev/e1000/if_igb.c (working copy) @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ #ifdef HAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS #include "opt_device_polling.h" #include "opt_inet.h" +#include "opt_altq.h" #endif #include Index: sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c =================================================================== --- sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c (revision 203324) +++ sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c (working copy) @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ #ifdef HAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS #include "opt_device_polling.h" #include "opt_inet.h" +#include "opt_altq.h" #endif #include --5mCyUwZo2JvN/JJP--