Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:35:21 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> To: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: inpcb/inpcbinfo rwlocking: coming to a 7-STABLE branch near you Message-ID: <200808132135.m7DLZTeK039233@lava.sentex.ca> In-Reply-To: <20080813212544.GA25915@eos.sc1.parodius.com> References: <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808031142550.65130@fledge.watson.org> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808082219360.16028@fledge.watson.org> <200808120059.m7C0xvUH028011@lava.sentex.ca> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808121119040.86332@fledge.watson.org> <200808132034.m7DKY7wm038972@lava.sentex.ca> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808132138170.41778@fledge.watson.org> <7.1.0.9.0.20080813164157.161ba2e8@sentex.net> <200808132116.m7DLGY1f039165@lava.sentex.ca> <20080813212544.GA25915@eos.sc1.parodius.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 05:25 PM 8/13/2008, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> >
> > I will try a kernel before the em changes, as thats the only other thing
> > I can think of off the top of my head.
I commented out em from the kernel and loaded up a previous version
via kld, but still the same thing, although not nearly as much
0[smtp2]# arp -na | wc
89 680 5081
0[smtp2]#
em0@pci0:0:4:0: class=0x020000 card=0x387010f1 chip=0x10768086
rev=0x05 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'Intel Corporation'
device = '82541EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller'
class = network
subclass = ethernet
cap 01[dc] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0
cap 07[e4] = PCI-X supports 2048 burst read, 1 split transaction
em1@pci0:0:5:0: class=0x020000 card=0x387010f1 chip=0x10768086
rev=0x05 hdr=0x00
vendor = 'Intel Corporation'
device = '82541EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller'
class = network
subclass = ethernet
cap 01[dc] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0
cap 07[e4] = PCI-X supports 2048 burst read, 1 split transaction
>That almost looks like some kind of ARP storm, sans repetitive entries
>(that definitely looks odd). Does tcpdump on em1 show a particular
>machine or router demanding MACs for 64.7.153.0/24 (or whatever the
>block is)?
No, its very, very quiet. All the other machines on the 2 networks
are just fine.
Any suggestions on what kernel to go back to start from ?
---Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200808132135.m7DLZTeK039233>