Re: [E1000-devel] nic Q67 crash kernel under load
Hello, Fujinaka, Todd wrote: Those are completely different parts with completely different architectures (and completely different problems). All the fixes I know for your onboard part (the 82579LM if I'm reading things correctly) are from the motherboard group so you should check to see that your BIOS is up-to-date. It seems that if I set in the BIOS: South Bridge ASPM Support - L0s and L1 support (previously it was Disabled) then it does not crash. If I understand it corretly: http://www.intel.com/p/en_US/embedded/hwsw/hardware/core-qm67-hm65/overview the 82579LM is connected to a QM67 southbridge, so the BIOS setting makes sense. Enabling the setting affects: (lspci -vv) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Cougar Point PCI Express Root Port 1 (rev b4) 00:1c.4 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Cougar Point PCI Express Root Port 5 03:00.0 USB Controller: NEC Corporation uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host Controller (rev 03) from: LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; to: LnkCtl: ASPM L0s L1 Enabled regards, Martin -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
Re: [E1000-devel] 82571EB: Detected Hardware Unit Hang
Someone else pointed this out to me locally. If you have a non-client BIOS, you should be able to set the MaxPayloadSize using setpci. You have to make sure that you're being consistent throughout all the associated links. Todd Fujinaka Technical Marketing Engineer LAN Access Division (LAD) Intel Corporation todd.fujin...@intel.com (503) 712-4565 -Original Message- From: Ethan Zhao [mailto:ethan.ker...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:10 PM To: Fujinaka, Todd Cc: Joe Jin; Ben Hutchings; Mary Mcgrath; net...@vger.kernel.org; e1000-de...@lists.sf.net; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux-pci Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] 82571EB: Detected Hardware Unit Hang Joe, Possibly your customer is running a kernel without source code on a platform whose vendor wouldn't like to fix BIOS issue( Is that a HP/Dell server ?). Anyway, to see if is a payload issue or, you could change the payload size with setpci tool to those devices and set the link retrain bit to trigger the link retraining to debug the issue and identity the root cause. I thinks it is much easier than modify the BIOS or eeprom of NIC. e.g. set device control register to 0f 00 (128 bytes payload size) # setpci -v -s 00:02.0 98.w=000f set device link control register to 60h (retrain the link) # setpci -v -s 00:02.0 a0.b=60 Hope it works, Just my 2 cents. ethan.z...@oracle.com On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Fujinaka, Todd todd.fujin...@intel.com wrote: The only EEPROM I know about or can speak to is the one attached to the 82571 and it doesn't set the MaxPayloadSize. That's done by the BIOS. Todd Fujinaka Technical Marketing Engineer LAN Access Division (LAD) Intel Corporation todd.fujin...@intel.com (503) 712-4565 -Original Message- From: Joe Jin [mailto:joe@oracle.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:31 AM To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Fujinaka, Todd; Mary Mcgrath; net...@vger.kernel.org; e1000-de...@lists.sf.net; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; linux-pci Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] 82571EB: Detected Hardware Unit Hang On 11/28/12 02:10, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 17:32 +, Fujinaka, Todd wrote: Forgive me if I'm being too repetitious as I think some of this has been mentioned in the past. We (and by we I mean the Ethernet part and driver) can only change the advertised availability of a larger MaxPayloadSize. The size is negotiated by both sides of the link when the link is established. The driver should not change the size of the link as it would be poking at registers outside of its scope and is controlled by the upstream bridge (not us). [...] MaxPayloadSize (MPS) is not negotiated between devices but is programmed by the system firmware (at least for devices present at boot - the kernel may be responsible in case of hotplug). You can use the kernel parameter 'pci=pcie_bus_perf' (or one of several others) to set a policy that overrides this, but no policy will allow setting MPS above the device's MaxPayloadSizeSupported (MPSS). Ben, Unfortunately I'm using 3.0.x kernel and this is not included in the kernel. So I'm trying to use ethtool modify it from eeprom to see if help or no. Todd, I'll review all MaxPayload for all devices, but need to say if it mismatch, customer could not modify it from BIOS for there was not entry at there, to test it, we have to find how to verify if this is the root cause, so still need to find the offset in eeprom. Thanks in advance, Joe -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
[E1000-devel] latency issue with high packet rate and ixgbe
Hi, We are measuring packet latency on 10G port pair using bi-directional UDP 64 byte packets. Test machine is connected with load generator using direct 10G ports. Test machine configuration: CPU:2 - 6 core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5645 @ 2.40GHz(Total 12 cores) Memory:6 GB 10G ports:2 82599 SFP- lspci ID (0x10FB) kernel:Vanila-2.6.27.45 ixgbe:3.8.21 ixgbe driver is loaded with 6 Receive queues per NIC (each is binded with a specific core) and Dynamic ITR. We are measuring routing performance so no other network modules are loaded. We are generating load at 10G (bi-direction 20G) using 64byte UDP packets and getting throughput around 4 Gbps with per packet latency around 1.5 millisecond. (ksoftirqd is taking 99% cpu on few cores) So, seems to be pps rate is too high for the machine. On the other side, when we generate load at 2G (bi-direction 4G) using 64byte UDP packets, latency is reduced to 50 microseconds and ksoftirqd is also under control. Is there any way/configuration through which we can keep the low latency (around 100-150 microseconds) even at high incoming rate of packet even with packet drops ? Rgds, Nishit Shah -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
[E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged
I have determined that if the LAN cable is removed prior to a shutdown of a Toshiba Portege Z930, the system will hang. With the cable plugged in, the system shuts down fine. If I unload the e1000e ethernet driver prior to the shutdown request, the platform will shut down successfully. I am using the linux kernel 3.2.23. Are there any known issues with this driver? How can I go about debugging this? What files in particular should I instrument to help me understand what is going on? Thanks Roger R. Cruz -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
Re: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged
It probably does. How do I determine where this is configured in my kernel? I found this link and if I set the power management from auto to on as mentioned there, I am able to shutdown correctly. What is the proper way to fix this then? https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36132#c9 From: Allan, Bruce W [bruce.w.al...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 3:16 PM To: Roger Cruz; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged Sounds to me like a possible issue with runtime power management. Is that feature enabled in your kernel and for the LAN interface? -Original Message- From: Roger Cruz [mailto:roger.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 11:51 AM To: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged I have determined that if the LAN cable is removed prior to a shutdown of a Toshiba Portege Z930, the system will hang. With the cable plugged in, the system shuts down fine. If I unload the e1000e ethernet driver prior to the shutdown request, the platform will shut down successfully. I am using the linux kernel 3.2.23. Are there any known issues with this driver? How can I go about debugging this? What files in particular should I instrument to help me understand what is going on? Thanks Roger R. Cruz -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
Re: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged
Runtime power management is enabled in the kernel with the CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME parameter. According to the link, the issue is already fixed in a more recent kernel. AFAICR, it was not fixed in the driver, it was fixed elsewhere in the kernel. -Original Message- From: Roger Cruz [mailto:roger.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 1:28 PM To: Allan, Bruce W; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged It probably does. How do I determine where this is configured in my kernel? I found this link and if I set the power management from auto to on as mentioned there, I am able to shutdown correctly. What is the proper way to fix this then? https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36132#c9 From: Allan, Bruce W [bruce.w.al...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 3:16 PM To: Roger Cruz; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged Sounds to me like a possible issue with runtime power management. Is that feature enabled in your kernel and for the LAN interface? -Original Message- From: Roger Cruz [mailto:roger.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 11:51 AM To: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [E1000-devel] e1000e driver prevents Toshiba Z930 from shutting down when LAN cable is unplugged I have determined that if the LAN cable is removed prior to a shutdown of a Toshiba Portege Z930, the system will hang. With the cable plugged in, the system shuts down fine. If I unload the e1000e ethernet driver prior to the shutdown request, the platform will shut down successfully. I am using the linux kernel 3.2.23. Are there any known issues with this driver? How can I go about debugging this? What files in particular should I instrument to help me understand what is going on? Thanks Roger R. Cruz -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
[E1000-devel] e1000e Autonegotiation off problem
Hello, we have upgraded from 2.6.27.4 to 3.6.8 kernel. We have to operate a link at 100MBit/FD, no auto-neg. It worked with the 2.6.27.4 kernel, but does no longer work with 3.6.8: # ethtool -s eth2 speed 100 duplex full autoneg off Cannot set new settings: Invalid argument not setting speed not setting duplex not setting autoneg dmesg says: e1000e :08:00.0: eth2: Unsupported Speed/Duplex configuration The card: e1000e :03:00.0: eth2: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 00:1b:21:22:e4:10 e1000e :03:00.0: eth2: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection e1000e :03:00.0: eth2: MAC: 1, PHY: 4, PBA No: D50854-003 e1000e :06:00.0: Disabling ASPM L1 ACPI: PCI Interrupt Link [LNED] enabled at IRQ 18 e1000e :06:00.0: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic conserv ative mode Does one know whats wrong here? cu, Steffen -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: TUNE You got it built. Now make it sing. Tune shows you how. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
[E1000-devel] Multiple Link Up without Link Down
Hi, I am using e1000 driver. I happened to see multiple watdog messages in a small interval of time. But all those messages are Link is up 1000mbps full duplex . But there is no Link Down messages. How Link can go up multiple times without going down ? -Ratheesh -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: TUNE You got it built. Now make it sing. Tune shows you how. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
[E1000-devel] link flaps and tx dma
Hi, igb driver, Linux platform Suppose dma to tx ring is successful and There are a lot of link flaps happens in short period of time. So 1) NIC will queue these packets and try to transmit when link becomes up again ? 2) Suppose a lot of dma happens , where the new packets will store ? 3) How can i identify that packet transmission failed on NIC ? 3) Is there any way to identify that packet of tx_desc failed ? -Ratheesh -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: TUNE You got it built. Now make it sing. Tune shows you how. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel#174; Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
