Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 23:01:16 -0800 (PST) From: fbsdmail@dnswatch.com To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tx v2 error 0x6204<UNDERFLOW> - is this a new feature? Message-ID: <ea114525027252728df22ccf9da8affe.dnswclient@www.dnswatch.com> In-Reply-To: <20110112002751.GE6278@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <f765ac1cf5d77527d21ad2a83ee98d8c.dnswclient@www.dnswatch.com> <AANLkTi=CvNitBjG%2Br08NCTp_S=BwR7LZJ%2BeJuTkHAxVz@mail.gmail.com> <c91aeb7fe060c9d3548d120841d488fe.dnswclient@www.dnswatch.com> <AANLkTinZnkpPe2Xyh-tEJU0ZKJ%2BWjXprJFgVXj0XdPJs@mail.gmail.com> <30661ab452bce4de56f3e80f8682222a.dnswclient@www.dnswatch.com> <df34bd0d60eeff64cbb5c8a52147ede8.dnswclient@www.dnswatch.com> <20110111183315.GA6278@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <1682d2c7ead29c3c80ad0676f61beb2c.dnswclient@www.dnswatch.com> <20110112002751.GE6278@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greetings Pyun YongHyeon, and thank you for your reply. On Tue, January 11, 2011 4:27 pm, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 04:16:45PM -0800, fbsdmail@dnswatch.com wrote: > >> >> On Tue, January 11, 2011 10:33 am, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: >> > > [...] > > >>>>>> Does the link partner also agree on the resolved >>>>>> duplex(half-duplex)? It's not common to see half-duplex in these >>>>>> days. Please make sure link partner is also using >>>>>> auto-negotiation. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I thought that odd, as well. Both kerns have as nearly the same >>>>> options as is possible. Because the 8.1/amd64 is intended as a >>>>> replacement for the 8.0/i386. They're both on the same switch. >>>>> >>>> >>>> OK. Sorry, it just occurred to me that they /aren't/ both 10/100's >>>> The 8.1/amd64 (nfe0) is 10/100/1000, which might account for the >>>> half-dup. Just thought I'd mention it - but I'm sure you already >>>> discovered that :P >>>> >>> >>> I don't know any auto-negotiation issues of ciphy(4) so please >>> verify whether the switch sees the same resolved speed/duplex. If you >>> manually configured switch port to use 100Mbps/full-duplex it would >>> create problems since resolved duplex for the parallel detection is >>> normally half-duplex. This will cause duplex mismatch and you will see >>> lots of unexpected problems. If both parties use the same forced media >>> configuration in 10/100Mbps mode it would work but nfe(4) has one >>> unresolved issue for that case(mainly due to lack of documentation). >>> Without >>> auto-negotiation, some nfe(4) controllers do not work correctly. >>> >>> nfe(4) also supports hardware MAC counters for supported controllers >>> and I think your controller supports that. See what counters you have >>> with "sysctl dev.nfe.0.stats". >>> >> I'm going to be away for a couple of hours. >> Here's a dump of sysctl dev.nfe.0.stats, in the meantime: >> >> >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.frame_errors: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.extra_bytes: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.late_cols: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.runts: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.jumbos: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.fifo_overuns: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.crc_errors: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.fae: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.len_errors: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.unicast: 711887 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.multicast: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.rx.broadcast: 36072 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.octets: 400617598 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.zero_rexmits: 420611 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.one_rexmits: 171560 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.multi_rexmits: 64390 >> > > Two counters above clearly indicates there are collisions in link. > Check switch configuration and make it use auto-negotiation. Closer examination of the switch seems to indicate one of the ports is flaky (the nfe0 port). Well, that's good enough for me - this switch is going to go to the recycling depot, and I'm going to purchase a new one tomorrow. I'll report back as to whether the <UNDERFLOW> errors stop with the use of the new switch. Thank you very much Pyun YongHyeon for all your time and consideration. --Chris > > >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.late_cols: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.fifo_underuns: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.carrier_losts: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.excess_deferrals: 0 >> dev.nfe.0.stats.tx.retry_errors: 182 >> >> >> Thank you for all your time and consideration Pyun YongHyeon. >> >> >> --Chris >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-amd64-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > -- kern: FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE amd64
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ea114525027252728df22ccf9da8affe.dnswclient>