From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 13 00:02:59 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1659106564A for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:02:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qy0-f175.google.com (mail-qy0-f175.google.com [209.85.221.175]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C2DA8FC08 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:02:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk5 with SMTP id 5so7089017qyk.3 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:02:58 -0700 (PDT) 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=HG3jeTU5T48qQUXYkdMC4FkAHLIyxs5ZyAZ71m9hcyk=; b=CJY1k9FhGw6SADV8SXJUOj0xGeUD0j4MoT65pvNp3aW4DgniaFH0zgSuAIbOMyC6ps HGfI+D04CQ55vY8gJrvgH4AuRYf0YSvLV7xWgTGMQgHtQW2CJ6bBzBmtvtZX7i+30rb7 6HyCMrcmn3Fg9dpjDSs4Io9tc7WNtFxAJkCNY= 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=gVUkOAcc597B2eoIgZPdkFECwK5qigVS0BEAcn6JIPKtqZ6/a+ObwaDeqMr4drb6y2 Z8mKOw0ndX4wAeuEuP0orzEEQlgMpVBpMYJGFjxJQFAMysTxh+bCOb+I+27SUC+vVEOo 7NE2UIWW7Z0aQQZrmCrmkic5c73B0ohLwss+M= Received: by 10.229.182.4 with SMTP id ca4mr4070685qcb.90.1271116977609; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:02:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pyunyh@gmail.com ([174.35.1.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x34sm6753693qce.21.2010.04.12.17.02.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:02:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pyunyh@gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:02:55 -0700 From: Pyun YongHyeon Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:02:55 -0700 To: "Erich Jenkins, Fuujin Group Ltd" Message-ID: <20100413000255.GH1444@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <20100409070147.GA77350@korolev-net.ru> <4BBEE18C.6040204@fuujingroup.com> <20100409173821.GD1085@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <4BC016F3.4020300@fuujingroup.com> <20100410212520.GB6481@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <4BC12097.4030508@fuujingroup.com> <4BC19324.3050800@fuujingroup.com> <20100412175701.GC1444@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <20100412194209.GF1444@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <4BC3B676.3070503@fuujingroup.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BC3B676.3070503@fuujingroup.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Evgenii Davidov Subject: Re: Broadcom BCM5701 / HP NC6770 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: pyunyh@gmail.com List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:03:00 -0000 On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 06:10:30PM -0600, Erich Jenkins, Fuujin Group Ltd wrote: > Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:57:01AM -0700, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > >>On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 03:15:16AM -0600, Erich Jenkins, Fuujin Group Ltd > >>wrote: > >>>I've been muddling around in src/sys/dev on the old system and the new > >>>system and there appear to be rather major changes to MII and bge, > >>>possibly the whole stack? > >>> > >>It was not completely rewritten but many improvements were made. > >> > >>>There are a number of things that seem to have been merged with other > >>>parts of the network stack, or perhaps written into the individual > >>>drivers (someone working on the net stack would have to verify that). > >>> > >>>For instance, some files called in 5.3-REL seem to have gone away > >>>completely, and in the new (unpatched) version of if_bge.c under > >>>7.3-REL, calls to these modules are gone: > >>> > >>>- #include /* for vtophys */ > >>>- #include /* for vtophys */ > >>One of the most significant changes would be bus_dma(9) conversion > >>which is required to all drivers to make it work correctly on a > >>variety of platforms. bus_dma(9) does not directly use vtophys > >>anymore so these headers were nuked. > >> > >>>- #include /* for DELAY */ > >>>- #include > >>> > >>>- #include (called but something changed in here) > >>>- #include (ditto above) > >>> > >>No, these headers are still present. > >> > >>>It appears that the checksum features have been completely rewritten, > >>Checksum offloading was not completely rewritten but workaround > >>for buggy controllers was added. > >> > >>>and some of the ring settings have changed. It's interesting that the > >>>driver only fills 256 of the rx rings in the hopes that the cpu is "fast > >>>enough to keep up with the NIC". Would a subroutine here to grab the cpu > >>That magic number 256 is adequate for most cases but it may not be > >>enough to handle heavy loads. Internally the controller use fixed > >>512 RX buffers but bge(4) used only half of the buffers to save > >>resources. I think you can increase SSLOTS to 512 to get full 512 > >>RX buffers. > >> > >>>clock and count (number of procs/pipelines) be more trouble than it's > >>>worth to "automagically" increase the number of rx rings the driver > >>>fills based on the system in which it's installed? > >>> > >>Dynamically increasing number of RX buffers is doable but it would > >>add much more code. If there is high demand for that I would just > >>increase number of RX buffers to 512. Controller can't be > >>configured to have more than 512 RX buffers. > >> > >>>Something also changed in pci/pcireg.h and pci/pcivar.h, but I haven't > >>>had the time to hunt down and expand the source tree from the 5.3-REL > >>>branch yet. > >>> > >>>I have other machines with copper nics utilizing the bge driver, and > >>>there are no issues at all. Perhaps I'm getting ahead of things, but > >>Yes that is expected one. :-) > >> > >>>since this seems to have been broken through several releases, would it > >>>make any sense to split the support between the BCM5701KHB chipset and > >>>the more recent BCM chipset to avoid causing issues with cards/systems > >>>not currently experiencing troubles? > >>> > >>I'd like to if I can. Supporting huge number of different > >>controllers in single driver is maintenance nightmare. However, > >>rewriting some part that require special handling for certain > >>controller/revision is too risky because I don't have access to > >>most controllers. > >> > >>One theory for the issue I got while reading the code is link state > >>handling. As I said in previous mail, link state handling for TBI > >>is somewhat tricky in bge(4) and driver seemed to rely on periodic > >>register access to keep track of link state. I guess polling(4) may > >>give different behavior on link state handling as it does not rely > >>on interrupts at all. So would you try to use polling(4) and see > >>that make any difference on your box? > > > >If polling(4) make it work, try attached patch. > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > I'll get this set up. I've got a jail issues on 7.0-REL that I'm trying > to figure out too, so it might take a few hours before I get to this. > I beleive bge(4) in 7.0-RELEASE and 7.3-RELEASE is quite different. So I'm not sure whether the patch works on 7.0-RELEASE. > I just checked on a reported iSCSI error on a machine using a BCM5721 > nic (copper gigE) and I'm seeing issues like this: > > Apr 11 06:24:59 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:iscsi.c:1149: ***ERROR*** Bad > "Opcode": Got 0 expected 5. > Apr 11 06:24:59 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:target.c:1317: ***ERROR*** > iscsi_write_data_decap() failed > Apr 11 16:51:52 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:iscsi.c:1149: ***ERROR*** Bad > "Opcode": Got 0 expected 5. > Apr 11 16:51:52 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:target.c:1317: ***ERROR*** > iscsi_write_data_decap() failed > Apr 12 10:32:49 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:iscsi.c:1149: ***ERROR*** Bad > "Opcode": Got 0 expected 5. > Apr 12 10:32:49 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:target.c:1317: ***ERROR*** > iscsi_write_data_decap() failed > Apr 12 11:55:42 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:iscsi.c:1149: ***ERROR*** Bad > "Opcode": Got 0 expected 5. > Apr 12 11:55:42 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:target.c:1317: ***ERROR*** > iscsi_write_data_decap() failed > Apr 12 14:07:13 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:iscsi.c:1149: ***ERROR*** Bad > "Opcode": Got 0 expected 5. > Apr 12 14:07:13 san0 iscsi-target: pid 863:target.c:1317: ***ERROR*** > iscsi_write_data_decap() failed > > Any chance this could be because of the NIC chipset? I don't see this on > any of the machines configured identically, using the em driver for > Intel GigE nics. > Have no idea what happens here. Does this also happen on 7.3-RELEASE?