sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-01 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
Conditions: * Recently upgraded from 4.8 to 4.9 on a firewall/gateway box. All working well (clock source lags for some reason, but other than that fine). * Onboard bge network chipsets do not support MTU > 1504 (needed for QinQ tagged traffic) * Added PCI-X Intel PRO MT-1000 dual port card * Rebo

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-01 Thread Mark Kettenis
Can you try the diff below? Index: if_em.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/pci/if_em.c,v retrieving revision 1.256 diff -u -p -r1.256 if_em.c --- if_em.c 22 Apr 2011 10:09:57 - 1.256 +++ if_em.c 1 Jun 2011 09:40:53 -00

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-01 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
Hrm does not apply cleanly - Maybe I should just grab the CVS of if_em.c ? bash-4.1# patch -i if_em.c.patch Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me... The text leading up to this was: -- |Index: if_em.c |=== |

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-01 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
Not compiling cleanly against -stable I guess there have been extra definitions elsewhere. ET -DALTQ -DINET6 -DIPSEC -DPPP_BSDCOMP -DPPP_DEFLATE -DMROUTING -DMPLS -DBOOT_CONFIG -DSUN4US -DSUN4V -DPCIVERBOSE -DUSER_PCICONF -DAPERTURE -DUSBVERBOSE -DWSEMUL_SUN -DWSEMUL_NO_VT100 -DWSEMUL_DUMB -DWSDIS

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-02 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
Any further suggestions? I am going to have to ditch openbsd because of this bug I am afraid fw needs more interfaces ;-/ -current isn't building for me either at the moment. On 2 June 2011 01:55, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote: > Not compiling cleanly against -stable I guess there have been extra >

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-02 Thread Mark Kettenis
> Sender: aener...@aenertia.net > From: Joel Wiramu Pauling > Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 00:39:45 +1200 > > --000e0cdf0f40bfd8e304a4b9ef86 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Any further suggestions? I am going to have to ditch openbsd because of this > bug I am afraid fw needs more interfa

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-02 Thread Stuart Henderson
On 2011/06/03 00:39, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote: > -current isn't building for me either at the moment. Assuming you're starting from a recent snapshot before building, most likely you need to update config to latest sources, rebuild it, and re-run config. http://www.openbsd.org/faq/current.html#

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-02 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
Using src.tar.gz and sys.tar.gz from aarnet mirror in OZ. I cleaned everything - out of /usr/src before starting... Will have another go cheers. On 3 June 2011 01:00, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Sender: aener...@aenertia.net > > From: Joel Wiramu Pauling > > Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 00:39:45 +1200

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-02 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
for stable that is. On 3 June 2011 01:54, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote: > Using src.tar.gz and sys.tar.gz from aarnet mirror in OZ. I cleaned > everything - out of /usr/src before starting... > > Will have another go cheers. > > > > > On 3 June 2011 01:00, Mark Kettenis wrote: > >> > Sender: aener

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-03 Thread Joel Wiramu Pauling
Thanks guys, on first glance this appears to have fixed the panic on up. Not being C inclined can anyone offer an explanation? On 3 June 2011 01:54, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote: > for stable that is. > > > On 3 June 2011 01:54, Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote: > >> Using src.tar.gz and sys.tar.gz from

Re: sparc64 (sun v215) panics on bringing up intel Pro 1000- mt (em0) device

2011-06-03 Thread Mark Kettenis
> From: Joel Wiramu Pauling > Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 23:58:06 +1200 > > Thanks guys, on first glance this appears to have fixed the panic on up. Thanks for testing; the fix has been committed to -current. > Not being C inclined can anyone offer an explanation? The old code was doing an unaligne