Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
You can probably turn hw.ixgbe.num_queues down to 2 or 4 and cut your mbuf consumption dramatically without noticing any loss of performance. -A On Jun 22, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Rick Miller wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: Increase your system mbuf pool size, you do not want that failure to happen. Thanks, Jack. I saw a thread where you discussed this. You are referring to kern.ipc.nmbclusters, correct? Should I also adjust the following? hw.ixgbe.rxd hw.ixgbe.txd hw.ixgbe.num_queues hw.intr_storm_threshold -- Andrew Boyerabo...@averesystems.com ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: Would probably be good to take care of the storm threshold if you haven't, set it to 0 and you disable the check, that's what we do internally. As for the queues and number of descriptors, that's kind of up to you, different work loads and environments work best with different setups. Hopefully, when you get rid of the rx ring setup failure you will get things working. Thanks, Jack. I did get rid of the rx ring failure. Link status still shows no carrier. I think everything looks right from the host's perspective. -- Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
Turns out the gbic in the switch was bad...I didn't think there was a problem on the host, but you all still gave me some good info. I appreciate it! On 6/25/12, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: Would probably be good to take care of the storm threshold if you haven't, set it to 0 and you disable the check, that's what we do internally. As for the queues and number of descriptors, that's kind of up to you, different work loads and environments work best with different setups. Hopefully, when you get rid of the rx ring setup failure you will get things working. Thanks, Jack. I did get rid of the rx ring failure. Link status still shows no carrier. I think everything looks right from the host's perspective. -- Take care Rick Miller -- Sent from my mobile device Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
Glad you figured it out. Cheers, Jack On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.comwrote: Turns out the gbic in the switch was bad...I didn't think there was a problem on the host, but you all still gave me some good info. I appreciate it! On 6/25/12, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: Would probably be good to take care of the storm threshold if you haven't, set it to 0 and you disable the check, that's what we do internally. As for the queues and number of descriptors, that's kind of up to you, different work loads and environments work best with different setups. Hopefully, when you get rid of the rx ring setup failure you will get things working. Thanks, Jack. I did get rid of the rx ring failure. Link status still shows no carrier. I think everything looks right from the host's perspective. -- Take care Rick Miller -- Sent from my mobile device Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
Hi All, Wondering if the Intel X520-DA2 10G Fibre NIC is supported in stable/8. Hardware notes don't specify it, but I have a system up and the interfaces appear to be loaded by the ix driver. However, status indicates no carrier. -- Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: Hi All, Wondering if the Intel X520-DA2 10G Fibre NIC is supported in stable/8. Hardware notes don't specify it, but I have a system up and the interfaces appear to be loaded by the ix driver. However, status indicates no carrier. Ok, brain fart. Please forgive my ineptitude. I once sent an email inquiring about the Intel 82599, which is this NIC. Responses to that mail say it's supported by the ixgbe driver. My stable/8 installation (5/21/2012) probes it with an ix driver that I cannot find any info on. The ixgbe manage indicates it only supports 82598 based controllers. Not sure what to think here... ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
The ixgbe driver creates devices named ix0, etc. I believe you need to run 'ifconfig ix0 up' before it will attempt to get link. -Andrew On Jun 22, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Rick Miller wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: Hi All, Wondering if the Intel X520-DA2 10G Fibre NIC is supported in stable/8. Hardware notes don't specify it, but I have a system up and the interfaces appear to be loaded by the ix driver. However, status indicates no carrier. Ok, brain fart. Please forgive my ineptitude. I once sent an email inquiring about the Intel 82599, which is this NIC. Responses to that mail say it's supported by the ixgbe driver. My stable/8 installation (5/21/2012) probes it with an ix driver that I cannot find any info on. The ixgbe manage indicates it only supports 82598 based controllers. Not sure what to think here... ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Andrew Boyerabo...@averesystems.com ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Andrew Boyer abo...@averesystems.com wrote: The ixgbe driver creates devices named ix0, etc. I believe you need to run 'ifconfig ix0 up' before it will attempt to get link. Thanks for clarifying that tidbit. At least I know the driver loading is the correct driver :) I did try ifup'ing the interface...it shows the interface up, status is still no carrier. I've had confirmation that the cable itself is good. I wonder if it matters that the upstream switch has VLAN tagging enabled? ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
On 22 Jun 2012, at 22:02, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Andrew Boyer abo...@averesystems.com wrote: The ixgbe driver creates devices named ix0, etc. I believe you need to run 'ifconfig ix0 up' before it will attempt to get link. Thanks for clarifying that tidbit. At least I know the driver loading is the correct driver :) I did try ifup'ing the interface...it shows the interface up, status is still no carrier. I've had confirmation that the cable itself is good. I wonder if it matters that the upstream switch has VLAN tagging enabled? Nope, having a link is layer 1, VLAN tagging happens at layer 3 iirc. If you're unsure, you can always create a VLAN interface bound to your NIC. I suppose you've tried reversing the fibre pair.___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
dmesg and ifconfig output below... On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Andrew Boyer abo...@averesystems.com wrote: The ixgbe driver creates devices named ix0, etc. I believe you need to run 'ifconfig ix0 up' before it will attempt to get link. Thanks for clarifying that tidbit. At least I know the driver loading is the correct driver :) I did try ifup'ing the interface...it shows the interface up, status is still no carrier. I've had confirmation that the cable itself is good. I wonder if it matters that the upstream switch has VLAN tagging enabled? ix0: Intel(R) PRO/10GbE PCI-Express Network Driver, Version - 2.4.5 port 0x7000-0x701f mem 0xf6b8-0xf6bf,0xf6b7-0xf6b73fff irq 40 at device 0.0 on pci7 ix0: Using MSIX interrupts with 9 vectors ix0: RX Descriptors exceed system mbuf max, using default instead! ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: Ethernet address: 90:e2:ba:15:e2:60 ix0: PCI Express Bus: Speed 5.0Gb/s Width x8 ix1: Intel(R) PRO/10GbE PCI-Express Network Driver, Version - 2.4.5 port 0x7020-0x703f mem 0xf6a8-0xf6af,0xf6a7-0xf6a73fff irq 44 at device 0.1 on pci7 ix1: Using MSIX interrupts with 9 vectors ix1: RX Descriptors exceed system mbuf max, using default instead! ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: Ethernet address: 90:e2:ba:15:e2:61 ix1: PCI Express Bus: Speed 5.0Gb/s Width x8 ix0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500 options=401bbRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO ether 90:e2:ba:XX:XX:XX inet 10.1.2.50 netmask 0xfe00 broadcast 10.1.3.255 media: Ethernet autoselect status: no carrier ix1: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500 options=401bbRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO ether 90:e2:ba:XX:XX:XX media: Ethernet autoselect status: no carrier -- Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
Increase your system mbuf pool size, you do not want that failure to happen. Jack On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.comwrote: dmesg and ifconfig output below... On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Andrew Boyer abo...@averesystems.com wrote: The ixgbe driver creates devices named ix0, etc. I believe you need to run 'ifconfig ix0 up' before it will attempt to get link. Thanks for clarifying that tidbit. At least I know the driver loading is the correct driver :) I did try ifup'ing the interface...it shows the interface up, status is still no carrier. I've had confirmation that the cable itself is good. I wonder if it matters that the upstream switch has VLAN tagging enabled? ix0: Intel(R) PRO/10GbE PCI-Express Network Driver, Version - 2.4.5 port 0x7000-0x701f mem 0xf6b8-0xf6bf,0xf6b7-0xf6b73fff irq 40 at device 0.0 on pci7 ix0: Using MSIX interrupts with 9 vectors ix0: RX Descriptors exceed system mbuf max, using default instead! ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: [ITHREAD] ix0: Ethernet address: 90:e2:ba:15:e2:60 ix0: PCI Express Bus: Speed 5.0Gb/s Width x8 ix1: Intel(R) PRO/10GbE PCI-Express Network Driver, Version - 2.4.5 port 0x7020-0x703f mem 0xf6a8-0xf6af,0xf6a7-0xf6a73fff irq 44 at device 0.1 on pci7 ix1: Using MSIX interrupts with 9 vectors ix1: RX Descriptors exceed system mbuf max, using default instead! ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: [ITHREAD] ix1: Ethernet address: 90:e2:ba:15:e2:61 ix1: PCI Express Bus: Speed 5.0Gb/s Width x8 ix0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500 options=401bbRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO ether 90:e2:ba:XX:XX:XX inet 10.1.2.50 netmask 0xfe00 broadcast 10.1.3.255 media: Ethernet autoselect status: no carrier ix1: flags=8802BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500 options=401bbRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO ether 90:e2:ba:XX:XX:XX media: Ethernet autoselect status: no carrier -- Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: Increase your system mbuf pool size, you do not want that failure to happen. Thanks, Jack. I saw a thread where you discussed this. You are referring to kern.ipc.nmbclusters, correct? Should I also adjust the following? hw.ixgbe.rxd hw.ixgbe.txd hw.ixgbe.num_queues hw.intr_storm_threshold ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Intel X520-DA2 Supported in stable/8?
Would probably be good to take care of the storm threshold if you haven't, set it to 0 and you disable the check, that's what we do internally. As for the queues and number of descriptors, that's kind of up to you, different work loads and environments work best with different setups. Hopefully, when you get rid of the rx ring setup failure you will get things working. Jack On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.comwrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: Increase your system mbuf pool size, you do not want that failure to happen. Thanks, Jack. I saw a thread where you discussed this. You are referring to kern.ipc.nmbclusters, correct? Should I also adjust the following? hw.ixgbe.rxd hw.ixgbe.txd hw.ixgbe.num_queues hw.intr_storm_threshold ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
