Thanks, Christopher. But I think my problem may does not related to
TSO issue. I have tried disable tso with "ifconfig igb(x) -tso" and
ovserved with "netstat -ihw 1", and found "oErrs" does not disappeared.
Regards
Simon
于 14-3-25 22:08, Christopher Forgeron 写道:
Hi Simon,
Try checking o
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Markus Gebert
wrote:
>
>
> Is 65517 correct? With Ricks patch, I get this:
>
> dev.ix.0.hw_tsomax: 65518
>
Perhaps a difference between 9.2 and 10 for one of the macros? My code is:
ifp->if_hw_tsomax = IP_MAXPACKET - (ETHER_HDR_LEN + ETHER_VLAN_ENCAP_LEN);
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 07:10:35PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First off, I hope you don't mind that I cross-posted this,
> but I wanted to make sure both the NFS/iSCSI and networking
> types say it.
> If you look in this mailing list thread:
>
> http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?185
That's interesting. I see here in the r251296 commit Andre says :
Drivers can set ifp->if_hw_tsomax before calling ether_ifattach() to
change the limit.
I wonder if we add your same TSO patch to if_lagg.c before line 356's
ether_ifattach() will fix it.
Ultimately, it will need to load the
Markus Gebert wrote:
>
> On 26.03.2014, at 00:06, Christopher Forgeron
> wrote:
>
> > Update:
> >
> > I'm changing my mind, and I believe Rick's TSO patch is fixing
> > things
> > (sorry). In looking at my notes, it's possible I had lagg on for
> > those
> > tests. lagg does seem to negate the
On 26.03.2014, at 00:06, Christopher Forgeron wrote:
> Update:
>
> I'm changing my mind, and I believe Rick's TSO patch is fixing things
> (sorry). In looking at my notes, it's possible I had lagg on for those
> tests. lagg does seem to negate the TSO patch in my case.
I’m glad to hear you co
Christopher Forgeron wrote:
> Update:
>
> I'm changing my mind, and I believe Rick's TSO patch is fixing
> things
> (sorry). In looking at my notes, it's possible I had lagg on for
> those
> tests. lagg does seem to negate the TSO patch in my case.
>
Ok, that's useful information. It implies t
Hi,
First off, I hope you don't mind that I cross-posted this,
but I wanted to make sure both the NFS/iSCSI and networking
types say it.
If you look in this mailing list thread:
http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1850411724.1687820.1395621539316.JavaMail.root
you'll see that several people hav
On 25.03.2014, at 23:21, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Markus Gebert wrote:
>>
>> On 25.03.2014, at 22:46, Rick Macklem wrote:
>>
>>> Markus Gebert wrote:
On 25.03.2014, at 02:18, Rick Macklem
wrote:
> Christopher Forgeron wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> This is regar
Update:
I'm changing my mind, and I believe Rick's TSO patch is fixing things
(sorry). In looking at my notes, it's possible I had lagg on for those
tests. lagg does seem to negate the TSO patch in my case.
kernel.10stable_basicTSO_65535/
- IP_MAXPACKET = 65535;
- manually forced (no if statem
Markus Gebert wrote:
>
> On 25.03.2014, at 22:46, Rick Macklem wrote:
>
> > Markus Gebert wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25.03.2014, at 02:18, Rick Macklem
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Christopher Forgeron wrote:
>
>
>
> This is regarding the TSO patch that Rick suggested earlier.
> >>>
On 25.03.2014, at 22:46, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Markus Gebert wrote:
>>
>> On 25.03.2014, at 02:18, Rick Macklem wrote:
>>
>>> Christopher Forgeron wrote:
This is regarding the TSO patch that Rick suggested earlier. (With
many thanks for his time and suggestion)
>>>
Markus Gebert wrote:
>
> On 25.03.2014, at 02:18, Rick Macklem wrote:
>
> > Christopher Forgeron wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> This is regarding the TSO patch that Rick suggested earlier. (With
> >> many thanks for his time and suggestion)
> >>
> >>
> >> As I mentioned earlier, it did not fix
On Mar 25, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Ryan Stone wrote:
> You might want to take a look at the projects/sv branch, which
> implement kernel core dumps over the network. We had to solve a
> similar problem there (in lem, em, igb and ixgbe) and ended up
> piggybacking on most of the DEVICE_POLLING code to
I'm quite positive that an IP_MAXPACKET = 65518 would fix this, as I've
never seen a packet overshoot by more than 11 bytes, although that's just
in my case. It's next up on my test list.
BTW, to answer the next message: I am expierencing the error with a raw ix
or lagg interface. Originally I w
You might want to take a look at the projects/sv branch, which
implement kernel core dumps over the network. We had to solve a
similar problem there (in lem, em, igb and ixgbe) and ended up
piggybacking on most of the DEVICE_POLLING code to do it. The work
ended up stalling over objections over c
This isn't the same as the polled driver; this is sending and receiving a
single packet at a time.
I've gotten (at least to a somewhat workable degree) Apple's KDP ported to
FreeBSD. I've only changed the dev/e1000/if_lem.c driver for now (that's the
one VMWare shows up as :)), but since I'm n
There has been a long thread on stable about sshd processes being hung due
to sockets remaining in a CLOSED state for extended periods in 10-stable.
This did not seem to be happening with 9.2. (Not sure about 10.0.)
Was here a change in the network stack on 10 that would have kept CLOSED
sockets a
Hi guys,
I'm in meetings today, so I'll respond to the other emails later.
Just wanted to clarify about tp->t_tsomax : I can't make a solid assertion
about it's value as I only tracked it briefly. I did see it being !=
if_hw_tsomax, but that was a short test and should really be checked more
ca
Hi Simon,
Try checking out the "9.2 ixgbe tx queue hang' thread here, and see if it
applies to you.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:55 AM, k simon wrote:
> Hi,Lists:
> I have got lots of "no buffer available" on 10-stable with igb nic.
> But em and bce works well. And I tried force igb to 4 or 8
Hey guys,
I have nothing on your code level to add, but.. while investigating this
issue I ran into the guy that originally created the bug (
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=183390&cat=). In the email
exchange that followed he told me that had found a workaround by running a
specific -S
On 25.03.2014, at 02:18, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Christopher Forgeron wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> This is regarding the TSO patch that Rick suggested earlier. (With
>> many thanks for his time and suggestion)
>>
>>
>> As I mentioned earlier, it did not fix the issue on a 10.0 system. It
>> did make it
22 matches
Mail list logo
