Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:16:33 +0900 From: Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com> To: Milan Obuch <freebsd-net@dino.sk> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: re weird bug Message-ID: <20081117041633.GI50872@cdnetworks.co.kr> In-Reply-To: <200811150913.16407.freebsd-net@dino.sk> References: <200810300829.35980.freebsd-net@dino.sk> <200811032339.07412.freebsd-net@dino.sk> <20081104014604.GB98154@cdnetworks.co.kr> <200811150913.16407.freebsd-net@dino.sk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 09:13:15AM +0100, Milan Obuch wrote: > On Tuesday 04 November 2008 02:46:04 Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 11:39:06PM +0100, Milan Obuch wrote: > > > On Monday 03 November 2008 04:59:08 Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > > > > > > [ snip ] > > > > > > > I vaguely guess hardware was not properly initialized. How about > > > > this one? > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/re/re.phy.patch.20081103 > > > > > > This bug seems again to disappear - csup two days ago, kernel built with > > > no patches and everything works. Something like this happened already in > > > the > > > > Yeah, this is one of reason that makes it hard to fix. > > > > > past. No idea whether it has something with if_re being built as module, > > > but if it happens again, I will test this possibility, too. > > > > Ok. Please let me know your findings. > > Strange. This trouble occured again. Two days ago, fresh csup, rebuilt whole > system, re works only when with verbose boot logging. Yesterday, fresh csup, > full rebuild, re works again. There is no change in if_re.c at all - it is > dated Sep 9, 2008. This is coming from somewhere else, but I have no idea how > this could be debugged. One possibility is there is some weird issue with > code or maybe more probably buffer placement in memory, but this is just a > shot in the wild, and no idea what means could be used to trace that. > > It occurs to me from time to time, only with -current, everytime verbose boot > logging masks the trouble, at least everytime I tried. Really weird, not > predictable. And maybe only difference tracking one per one could give some If verbose boot always hide the issye how about adding a DELAY in re_attach()? You may add a DELAY line, say DELAY(2000), before any PHY access(around line number 1307 in if_re.c) Did it make difference? > clue, but this is really time consuming (apply change, rebuild kernel, > reboot, test... grrr). > > Regards, > Milan -- Regards, Pyun YongHyeon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081117041633.GI50872>