From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 23 19:35:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3D121065673 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:35:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amarat@ksu.ru) Received: from mx.kzn.ru (mx.kzn.ru [194.85.243.39]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 172DC8FC1A for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:35:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amarat@ksu.ru) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,314,1231102800"; d="scan'208";a="1336445" Received: from mail.ksu.ru (HELO ruby.ksu.ru) ([193.232.252.56]) by iout.kzn.ru with ESMTP; 23 Jan 2009 22:35:21 +0300 X-Pass-Through: Kazan State University Network Received: from zealot.ksu.ru ([194.85.245.161]) by ksu.ru (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n0NJVwQ2007249; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:31:59 GMT Received: from zealot.ksu.ru (localhost.lnet [127.0.0.1]) by zealot.ksu.ru (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n0NJY70X063106; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:34:07 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from amarat@ksu.ru) Message-ID: <497A1BAF.9090502@ksu.ru> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:34:07 +0300 From: "Marat N.Afanasyev" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080903 SeaMonkey/1.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Langille References: <49774BAE.3000809@ksu.ru> <20090122071845.GF4881@alf.bsdes.net> <4978A10A.9060006@langille.org> <7697CDAB-B4E7-480A-B31A-1F54275B8D54@langille.org> In-Reply-To: <7697CDAB-B4E7-480A-B31A-1F54275B8D54@langille.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Victor Balada Diaz , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Pete French Subject: Re: interrupt storm on MSI IXP600 based motherboards X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:35:25 -0000 Dan Langille wrote: > > On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote: > >> Victor Balada Diaz wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote: >>>>>> trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and -STABLE, >>>>>> but storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may appear on any >>>>>> device. if any device generates enough interrupts rate, storm will >>>>>> arrive. >>>>> Yes, I just got another storm, on my ATA controller this time. Ah >>>>> well, so much for the idea of disabling unneeded devices! >>>>> >>>>> -pete. >>>>> >>>> it's a kind of magic, really. I built a new kernel with KDB and DDB >>>> and after 1 day, 13:15 I'm still waiting for storm to arrive. And I >>>> added >>>> hw.acpi.osname="Linux" to /boot/loader.conf. >>> Try doing lots of IO and you will get the problem soon. You might >>> want to try: >>> while true; do dd if=/dev/zero of=BAH bs=1M count=1024; sync; done >> >> FWIW, last night I changed the address of the comm port IO in my BIOS. >> Then I ran the Bacula regression test suite (lots of IO). For my >> machine, once the interrupt storm starts, it continues. I do not know >> if that happens to everyone. >> >> Since changing the address, I have had no interrupt storms. I have >> been running the above IO loop for about ten minutes. >> >> No storm yet (knock on wood). > > > And it's back: > > Jan 22 17:21:46 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; > throttling interrupt source > Jan 22 17:23:19 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; > throttling interrupt source > Jan 22 17:28:20 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; > throttling interrupt source > Jan 22 17:33:20 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; > throttling interrupt source > Jan 22 17:38:20 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; > throttling interrupt source > > I shall try the hw.acpi.osname="Linux" option now. > > From dmsg: Jan 22 18:10:07 polo kernel: ACPI: Overriding _OS definition > with "Linux" > it works for me for 3 days, 16:27 and still no sign of interrupt storm. and emu10kx0 generates as many as 93 interrupt per second without trouble. What is your situation? -- SY, Marat