It worked fine, but today I've got one more error: Mar 29 01:03:08 router kernel: igb1: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:08:02 router kernel: igb2: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:08:02 router kernel: igb3: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:11:01 router kernel: igb1: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:11:01 router kernel: igb0: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:13:11 router kernel: igb0: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:13:16 router kernel: igb1: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:13:42 router kernel: igb2: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping Mar 29 01:13:46 router kernel: igb3: Interface stopped DISTRIBUTING, possible flapping
On 19 March 2015 at 19:51, hiren panchasara <hi...@strugglingcoder.info> wrote: > On 03/17/15 at 12:34P, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > On 17 March 2015 at 11:33, Jason Wolfe <nitrobo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Hans Petter Selasky <h...@selasky.org> > wrote: > > >> On 03/16/15 10:37, Vitalii Duk wrote: > > >>> > > >>> I've changed use_flowid to 0 and it helped! But isn't it setting > > >>> significant? In a description it says "Shift flowid bits to prevent > > >>> multiqueue collisions". > > >> > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> Maybe your ethernet hardware is not properly setting the m_flowid ... > > >> > > >> --HPS > > >> > > > > > > Flip use_flowid back to 1 and try setting > > > net.link.lagg.default_flowid_shift / net.link.lagg.X.flowid_shift to 0 > > > as Hiren suggested. r260179 added this shift, which has caused us > > > balancing issues with the i350/igb. > > > > > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=260179 > > > > > > Based on Adrian's comment about igb/ixgbe not setting the 'full > > > flowid' under normal conditions, does that mean this shift should be 0 > > > by default to ensure we don't break balancing for devices that only > > > set the CPU/MSIX queue? > > > > Or we can just see if there's anything wrong with putting the full 32 > > bit RSS flowid in received packets that have them. > > It'd be nice to have but for now I am proposing following to fix a known > broken case because of an optimization: > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2098 > > Cheers, > Hiren > _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
