On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 01:54:54AM +0200, Per-Olov Sjvholm wrote:
> On 17 maj 2012, at 12:53, Garry Dolley wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 03:19:07AM -0700, Garry Dolley wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:13:30AM -0400, Simon Perreault wrote:
> >>> On 2012-05-11 04:15, Garry Dolley wrote:
> >>>> I now have an amd64 test VM set up, where I installed stock 5.0.
> >>>>
> >>>> I ran a lot of traffic over em0 without any timeouts.
> >>>
> >>> That's expected. 5.0 has been running without issue for me for a long
> time.
> >>>
> >>>> I also have been trying several -current kernels.
> >>>>
> >>>> As of:
> >>>>
> >>>>   OpenBSD 5.1-current (GENERIC) #205: Wed Mar 28 21:40:45 MDT 2012
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't see any em0 timeouts.
> >>>>
> >>>> I will continue to try newer ones and report back here...
> >>>
> >>> Why not just test 5.1? Problems have been reported against 5.1, not
> >>> -current.
> >>
> >> I now have a stock 5.1 test VM set up.
> >>
> >>  OpenBSD 5.1 (GENERIC) #181: Sun Feb 12 09:35:53 MST 2012
> >>      dera...@amd64.openbsd.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC
> >>
> >> I don't see any timeouts.  I grabbed the ports tree via curl several
> >> times and have been slaving away at it over SSH.  I don't notice
> >> anything wrong.
> >>
> >> So, perhaps this issue does not appear in stock 5.1, but in a newer
> >> kernel.  I'll try something newer soon...
> >
> > I have tried the following newer kernels:
> >
> > bsd.20120330
> > bsd.20120419
> > bsd.20120427
> > bsd.20120516
> >
> > I still can't reproduce the problem.
> >
> > I have disabled mpbios on all these kernels, forgot to mention that.
> >
> > I will leave this be for now; will pick it up again if any new
> > information should arise.
> >
> > --
> > Garry Dolley
> > ARP Networks, Inc. | http://www.arpnetworks.com | (818) 206-0181
> > Data center, VPS, and IP Transit solutions
> > Member Los Angeles County REACT, Unit 336 | WQGK336
> > Blog http://scie.nti.st
> >
> 
> 
> I have a running 4.9 release + patches ( i.e 4.9 stable) working perfect. When
> Updated to 5.1 release + patches I have real problems with watchdog timeout
> resets on my intel nic:s. Same hardware, but just different OpenBSD version.
> 
> I have tried a bunch of kernels from Stuart Henderson (Broken after 4.9.....).
> I have also recompiled the 5.1 stable kernel with most  versions of the
> if_em.c driver. I have compiled and tried the following...
> (note that the userland was 5.1 stable with all kernel tests)
> 
> bsd-5.1-stable
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.249
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.250
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.251
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.252
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.253
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.254
> bsd-5.1-stable_plus_if_em.c-1.263
> 
> Watchdog timeout resets on all versions.....
> 
> NOTE that the Watchdog timeout reset appears in version 1.249 of if_em.c as
> well. And that version is default in 4.9 stable which works fantastic. So if I
> haven't done anything totally wrong it must be related to something else in
> the kernel. So.... my nic hardware and the kvm bios is the same. And an
> if_em.c version that works in 4.9 is tried. ????????
> 
> 
> I can see above that you got rid of the problem by testing the same version as
> me.. But you use AMD and I use i386.
> Also... I have a firewall with 2 nic:s. Often ONE nic works but the other
> gives watchdog timeout resets and wont work.
> 
> Any clues?

I don't have any clues.  I wasn't able to reproduce the problem,
even though one customer I have who also upgraded experienced this
behavior.  They did not do a fresh install (that I'm aware), but
upgraded (similar to you).  I'm not sure what the previous version
was.  They have one NIC and I believe run amd64.

The only difference that I can see is that on a fresh 5.1 install,
there is no issue.  But if you upgrade from a previous release, then
the issue *might* appear.

-- 
Garry Dolley
ARP Networks, Inc. | http://www.arpnetworks.com | (818) 206-0181
Data center, VPS, and IP Transit solutions
Member Los Angeles County REACT, Unit 336 | WQGK336
Blog http://scie.nti.st

Reply via email to