Re: [head tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64

2010-09-22 Thread Pyun YongHyeon
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:08:46AM +, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote:

[...]

 cc -c -O2 -frename-registers -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing  -std=c99  -Wall 
 -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes  -Wmissing-prototypes 
 -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual  -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign 
 -fformat-extensions -nostdinc  -I. -I/src/sys -I/src/sys/contrib/altq 
 -D_KERNEL -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include opt_global.h -fno-common 
 -finline-limit=8000 --param inline-unit-growth=100 --param 
 large-function-growth=1000 -DGPROF -falign-functions=16 -DGPROF4 -DGUPROF 
 -fno-builtin -fno-omit-frame-pointer -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone  
 -mfpmath=387 -mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-sse3 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow  -msoft-float 
 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding -fstack-protector -Werror -pg 
 -mprofiler-epilogue /src/sys/dev/stge/if_stge.c
 /src/sys/dev/stge/if_stge.c: In function 'stge_poll':
 /src/sys/dev/stge/if_stge.c:1947: error: break statement not within loop or 
 switch
 /src/sys/dev/stge/if_stge.c:1953: error: break statement not within loop or 
 switch
 *** Error code 1
 
 Stop in /obj/src/sys/LINT.
 *** Error code 1
 

Sorry, it should be fixed now.
___
freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: [releng_7 tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64

2010-10-09 Thread Pyun YongHyeon
On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 11:57:29AM -0400, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote:
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:05 - tinderbox 2.6 running on freebsd-stable.sentex.ca
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:05 - starting RELENG_7 tinderbox run for amd64/amd64
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:05 - cleaning the object tree
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:38 - cvsupping the source tree
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:39 - /usr/bin/csup -z -r 3 -g -L 1 -h localhost -s 
 /tinderbox/RELENG_7/amd64/amd64/supfile
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - building world
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX=/obj
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/bin:/sbin
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - TARGET=amd64
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - TARGET_ARCH=amd64
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - TZ=UTC
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - __MAKE_CONF=/dev/null
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - cd /src
 TB --- 2010-10-09 14:18:50 - /usr/bin/make -B buildworld
  World build started on Sat Oct  9 14:18:51 UTC 2010
  Rebuilding the temporary build tree
  stage 1.1: legacy release compatibility shims
  stage 1.2: bootstrap tools
  stage 2.1: cleaning up the object tree
  stage 2.2: rebuilding the object tree
  stage 2.3: build tools
  stage 3: cross tools
  stage 4.1: building includes
  stage 4.2: building libraries
  stage 4.3: make dependencies
  stage 4.4: building everything
  stage 5.1: building 32 bit shim libraries
  World build completed on Sat Oct  9 15:49:21 UTC 2010
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - generating LINT kernel config
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - cd /src/sys/amd64/conf
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - /usr/bin/make -B LINT
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - building LINT kernel
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX=/obj
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/bin:/sbin
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - TARGET=amd64
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - TARGET_ARCH=amd64
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - TZ=UTC
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - __MAKE_CONF=/dev/null
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - cd /src
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:49:21 - /usr/bin/make -B buildkernel KERNCONF=LINT
  Kernel build for LINT started on Sat Oct  9 15:49:21 UTC 2010
  stage 1: configuring the kernel
  stage 2.1: cleaning up the object tree
  stage 2.2: rebuilding the object tree
  stage 2.3: build tools
  stage 3.1: making dependencies
  stage 3.2: building everything
 [...]
 cc -c -O2 -frename-registers -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing  -std=c99  -Wall 
 -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes  -Wmissing-prototypes 
 -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual  -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign 
 -fformat-extensions -nostdinc  -I. -I/src/sys -I/src/sys/contrib/altq 
 -D_KERNEL -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include opt_global.h -fno-common 
 -finline-limit=8000 --param inline-unit-growth=100 --param 
 large-function-growth=1000 -DGPROF -falign-functions=16 -DGPROF4 -DGUPROF 
 -fno-builtin -fno-omit-frame-pointer -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone  
 -mfpmath=387 -mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow  -msoft-float 
 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding -Werror -pg 
 -mprofiler-epilogue /src/sys/dev/sdhci/sdhci.c
 cc -c -O2 -frename-registers -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing  -std=c99  -Wall 
 -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes  -Wmissing-prototypes 
 -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual  -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign 
 -fformat-extensions -nostdinc  -I. -I/src/sys -I/src/sys/contrib/altq 
 -D_KERNEL -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include opt_global.h -fno-common 
 -finline-limit=8000 --param inline-unit-growth=100 --param 
 large-function-growth=1000 -DGPROF -falign-functions=16 -DGPROF4 -DGUPROF 
 -fno-builtin -fno-omit-frame-pointer -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone  
 -mfpmath=387 -mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow  -msoft-float 
 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding -Werror -pg 
 -mprofiler-epilogue /src/sys/dev/sf/if_sf.c
 /src/sys/dev/sf/if_sf.c: In function 'sf_poll':
 /src/sys/dev/sf/if_sf.c:1827: error: 'rx_npkts' undeclared (first use in this 
 function)
 /src/sys/dev/sf/if_sf.c:1827: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported 
 only once
 /src/sys/dev/sf/if_sf.c:1827: error: for each function it appears in.)
 cc1: warnings being treated as errors
 /src/sys/dev/sf/if_sf.c:1827: warning: 'return' with a value, in function 
 returning void
 *** Error code 1
 
 Stop in /obj/amd64/src/sys/LINT.
 *** Error code 1
 
 Stop in /src.
 *** Error code 1
 
 Stop in /src.
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:57:29 - WARNING: /usr/bin/make returned exit code  1 
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:57:29 - ERROR: failed to build lint kernel
 TB --- 2010-10-09 15:57:29 - 4972.50 user 554.31 system 5963.77 real
 
 
 http://tinderbox.freebsd.org/tinderbox-releng_7-RELENG_7-amd64-amd64.full

Should be fixed now. Sorry for the breakage.
___
freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW - is this a new feature?

2011-01-11 Thread Pyun YongHyeon
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:10 PM,  fbsdm...@dnswatch.com wrote:
 Greetings,
  I have been receiving these messages on a recent 8.1/AMD64 install.
 src/ports  world/kern about a week ago. Here is a block from the most
 recent output:
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW

 It appears to only occur when transmitting largish amounts of data
 across an NFS mount. I'm not sure where the MIN-threshold lies. But
 appears to be =1.5Mb.
 This fresh 8.1/AMD64 is part of a largish server farm comprised of
 7+ - 8.0 i386 servers. This one is the only AMD64. It is also the
 only AMD64. I experience this when mounting an 8.0/i386 server from
 this 8.1/AMD64. The i386 also has mounts on this 8.1/AMD64.
 relevant info:
 ### 8.0/i386
 8.0-STABLE FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE #0: /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/UDNS01  i386
 Tyan 2-CPU MB
 2 NIC's: fxp0 (only one in use)
 ### 8.1/AMD64
 FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/XII amd64
 MSI K9N4 Ultra
 CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+ (3511.34-MHz K8-class
 CPU)
 1 NIC nfe0
 ### common to both:
 rc.conf
 nfs_client_enable=YES
 nfs_reserved_port_only=YES
 nfs_server_enable=YES

 NIC's on both boards are 10/100's @100mbps

 Can anyone provide any insight as to why I should be receiving these
 messages on a fresh 8.1/amd64 install. Is 8.1 INcompatible with
 earlier versions?


No, I guess you're seeing one of unresolved nfe(4) issues.
By chance, are you using forced media configuration instead of
auto-negotiation?
Posting both dmesg and ifconfig nfe0 output would be useful.

 Thank you for all your time and consideration.

 --Chris
___
freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW - is this a new feature?

2011-01-11 Thread Pyun YongHyeon
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 01:14:49AM -0800, fbsdm...@dnswatch.com wrote:
 
 On Tue, January 11, 2011 1:01 am, fbsdm...@dnswatch.com wrote:
 
 
  On Tue, January 11, 2011 12:42 am, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
 
  On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 12:28 AM,  fbsdm...@dnswatch.com wrote:
 
 
  Greetings Pyun YongHyeon, and thank you for your reply.
  On Mon, January 10, 2011 11:40 pm, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
 
 
  On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:10 PM, ?fbsdm...@dnswatch.com wrote:
 
 
 
  Greetings,
  I have been receiving these messages on a recent 8.1/AMD64
  install. src/ports  world/kern about a week ago. Here is a block
  from the most recent output: nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
  nfe0: tx v2
  error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 
  [...]
 
 
 
  nfe0: tx v2 error 0x6204UNDERFLOW
 
 
 
 
  It appears to only occur when transmitting largish amounts of
  data across an NFS mount. I'm not sure where the MIN-threshold
  lies. But appears to be =1.5Mb. This fresh 8.1/AMD64 is part of a
  largish server farm comprised of 7+ - 8.0 i386 servers. This one
  is the only AMD64. It
  is also the only AMD64. I experience this when mounting an
  8.0/i386
  server from this 8.1/AMD64. The i386 also has mounts on this
  8.1/AMD64.
  relevant info: ### 8.0/i386 8.0-STABLE FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE #0:
  /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/UDNS01 ?i386
  Tyan 2-CPU MB
  2 NIC's: fxp0 (only one in use)
  ### 8.1/AMD64
  FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #0: /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/XII amd64
  MSI K9N4 Ultra
  CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+ (3511.34-MHz
  K8-class
  CPU)
  1 NIC nfe0
  ### common to both:
  rc.conf nfs_client_enable=YES nfs_reserved_port_only=YES
  nfs_server_enable=YES
 
  NIC's on both boards are 10/100's @100mbps
 
 
 
 
  Can anyone provide any insight as to why I should be receiving
  these messages on a fresh 8.1/amd64 install. Is 8.1 INcompatible
  with earlier versions?
 
 
  No, I guess you're seeing one of unresolved nfe(4) issues.
  By chance, are you using forced media configuration instead of
  auto-negotiation? Posting both dmesg and ifconfig nfe0 output
  would be useful.
 
  As dmesg(8) goes, I have no dmesg.boot on either box, and bouncing
  them is not an immediate option.
 
  ifconfig nfe0 (the 8.1/amd64) follows: # ifconfig nfe0 nfe0:
  flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
  options=8010bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,TSO4,LINKSTATE ether
  00:19:db:22:74:87
  inet XXX.XXX.XXX.26 netmask 0xffe0 broadcast XXX.XXX.XXX.31 inet6
  fe80::219:dbff:fe22:7487%nfe0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
  nd6 options=3PERFORMNUD,ACCEPT_RTADV media: Ethernet autoselect
  (100baseTX half-duplex)
 
 
 
  Does the link partner also agree on the resolved duplex(half-duplex)?
  It's not common to see half-duplex in these days.
  Please make sure link partner is also using auto-negotiation.
 
 
 
  I thought that odd, as well. Both kerns have as nearly the same options
  as is possible. Because the 8.1/amd64 is intended as a replacement for the
  8.0/i386. They're both on the same switch.
 
 OK. Sorry, it just occurred to me that they /aren't/ both 10/100's
 The 8.1/amd64 (nfe0) is 10/100/1000, which might account for the half-dup.
 Just thought I'd mention it - but I'm sure you already discovered that :P
 

I don't know any auto-negotiation issues of ciphy(4) so please
verify whether the switch sees the same resolved speed/duplex. If
you manually configured switch port to use 100Mbps/full-duplex it
would create problems since resolved duplex for the parallel
detection is normally half-duplex. This will cause duplex mismatch
and you will see lots of unexpected problems.
If both parties use the same forced media configuration in
10/100Mbps mode it would work but nfe(4) has one unresolved issue
for that case(mainly due to lack of documentation). Without
auto-negotiation, some nfe(4) controllers do not work correctly.

nfe(4) also supports hardware MAC counters for supported
controllers and I think your controller supports that. See what
counters you have with sysctl dev.nfe.0.stats.

___
freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-amd64
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-amd64-unsubscr...@freebsd.org