On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 04:40:08PM +0200, Per-Olov Sjvholm wrote: > > > On 19 maj 2012, at 08:11, Garry Dolley <gdol...@arpnetworks.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > > I have a fresh 5.1 rel plus stable patches. No upgrade...
What happened before you applied the stable patches? On the fresh 5.1 release without any changes, that is... -- 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
