Re: FreeBSD 8-STABLE on R620 w/ X520-DA2/Intel 82599
Be patient, a new version will hit HEAD soon with the ID added. Jack On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Rick Miller vmil...@hostileadmin.comwrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org wrote: On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:50:52AM -0400, Rick Miller wrote: Hi All, I have 2 hosts, HP DL360 G8 and Dell R620. Both have the X520-DA2/Intel 82599 10G Fiber NIC. Both also have the same FreeBSD 8-STABLE image. The Dell displays the following in dmesg and we are unable to configure the ix0 or ix1 interfaces where the HP works just fine. Wondering if anyone else has experienced this? pci4: network, ethernet at device 0.0 (no driver attached) pci4: network, ethernet at device 0.1 (no driver attached) Please see http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2012-June/032579.html it may be of some assistance. It looks like adding the Dell specific PCI IDs may be all thats required. Hrmm, very interesting indeed. How do I identify if/when/where the source has been updated? -- Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-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-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-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-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-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-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: LRO support for IPv6
The LRO code as it stands right now is IPV4 specific, it would be nice to extend it, one of many improvements that may get done at some point. Jack On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Venkat Duvvuru venkatduvvuru...@gmail.comwrote: Folks, Could somebody please tell about the base Freebsd version which has LRO support for IPv6? I'm using 9.0-RELEASE and I see that tcp_lro_rx is failing. Please confirm. /Venkat ___ freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: LRO support for IPv6
Oh, that's right, distracted with other projects and I forgot, now we just need to have an LRO that works with forwarding eh :) You ROCK bz :) Jack On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb b...@freebsd.org wrote: On 22. May 2012, at 16:50 , Jack Vogel wrote: The LRO code as it stands right now is IPV4 specific, it would be nice to extend it, one of many improvements that may get done at some point. I am about to commit it to HEAD. Bear another few days with me; I know I am running late but committing new code had less prio than some other real life things currently. I'll also bring TSO6, etc... /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: LRO support for IPv6
LRO is a huge win for 10G (as is TSO on the TX side), so odds are good its behind the drop, in any case you'll be able to test that soon :) Jack On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Venkat Duvvuru venkatduvvuru...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the response. I observed that there is a significant performance drop in case of IPv6 on the rx side. While I'm able to hit line rate ~9.5 Gbps on a 10gb NIC for IPv4..I could only get ~6 Gbps on the rx front for IPv6...However tx for IPv6 is on par with IPv4 hitting almost line rates. Could this be because of lack of LRO6?? Note: hwpmc profiling shows that most of the time is spent in the IPv6 stack code /Venkat On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb b...@freebsd.org wrote: On 22. May 2012, at 17:04 , Jack Vogel wrote: Oh, that's right, distracted with other projects and I forgot, now we just need to have an LRO that works with forwarding eh :) That's a 6 line bainaid commit afterwards, basically returning form the LRO queuing function in case forwarding is turned on for that address family; a proper solution for long term can than be done whenever we feel like it. The above we should have done years ago;) You ROCK bz :) Jack On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb b...@freebsd.org wrote: On 22. May 2012, at 16:50 , Jack Vogel wrote: The LRO code as it stands right now is IPV4 specific, it would be nice to extend it, one of many improvements that may get done at some point. I am about to commit it to HEAD. Bear another few days with me; I know I am running late but committing new code had less prio than some other real life things currently. I'll also bring TSO6, etc... -- Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: unsupported intel card registration issue
Its jfv, not jvf :) Support for that card is in CURRENT and STABLE/8, am almost certain its in 8.1. That's a quad-port 82576. Jack On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Jason jhelf...@e-e.com wrote: Hi, We have an add-on Intel card that isn't registering with the OS, and were wondering what would it take to have it properly identified so it may be used. This particular installation is FreeBSD 7.3, however we do have some 8.1 systems. This is a Dell PowerEdge R310. Here is a snip from pciconf for this card: no...@pci0:7:0:0: class=0x02 card=0xa02c8086 chip=0x10e88086 rev=0x01 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = 'Unknown (Unknown)' class = network subclass = ethernet no...@pci0:7:0:1: class=0x02 card=0xa02c8086 chip=0x10e88086 rev=0x01 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = 'Unknown (Unknown)' class = network subclass = ethernet non...@pci0:8:0:0: class=0x02 card=0xa02c8086 chip=0x10e88086 rev=0x01 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = 'Unknown (Unknown)' class = network subclass = ethernet non...@pci0:8:0:1: class=0x02 card=0xa02c8086 chip=0x10e88086 rev=0x01 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = 'Unknown (Unknown)' class = network subclass = ethernet Thanks! Jason ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: issues with Intel Pro/1000 and 1000baseTX
Better yet, just let them autoneg and you won't have these problems :) Jack On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Steven Hartland kill...@multiplay.co.ukwrote: Never only set one end manually, always set both the machine and the switch. Regards Steve - Original Message - From: James Tanis jta...@mdchs.org To: FreeBSD Questions freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 4:12 PM Subject: issues with Intel Pro/1000 and 1000baseTX I have a FreeBSD v7.0 box it has two Intel Pro/1000 NICs, the one in question is: em1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection Version - 6.7.3 port 0x2020-0x203f mem 0xd806-0xd807,0xd804-0xd805 irq 19 at device 0.1 on pci4 what we get after boot is: em1: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500 options=19bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4 ether 00:30:48:xx:xx:xx inet 192.168.1.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active The problem is that the NIC refuses to connect at 1000baseTX. It's connected to a HP Procurve 1700-24 switch which supports 1000baseTX on ports 23 and 24. This particular computer is connected on port 24. I have a much older end user system which uses the same card (but earlier revision), runs Windows XP and is plugged in to port 23. The end user system has no problem connecting at 1000baseTX. I have of course tried switching ports. Attempting to force 1000baseTX via: ifconfig em1 media 1000baseTX mediaopt full-duplex gets me: status: no carrier After forcing the NIC to go 1000baseTX the LEDs on the backpane are both off. I can only come to the conclusion that this is a driver issue based on previous experience and the simple fact that the end user system is capable of connecting at 1000baseTX. Anybody have any suggestions? I'm hoping I'm wrong. I'd rather not do an in-place upgrade, this is a production system and the main gateway for an entire school, when I do not even know for sure whether this will fix the problem. It's worth it to me though, having a 1000baseTX uplink from the switch would remove a major bottleneck for me. Any help would be appreciated. -- James Tanis Technical Coordinator Computer Science Department Monsignor Donovan Catholic High School ___ freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to postmas...@multiplay.co.uk. ___ freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: VLAN filtering on FreeBSD 7.0 / 6.3
This change requires kernel changes that may not be compatible with 6.X, I am not sure, I am not the owner of that code. Some reason you can't use 7.1 which will have everything you need? TSO is a hardware feature, I have never tested this, but my suspicion is that if its enabled on the hardware that it will transparently happen in the outbound TX stream, but I am not sure. Jack On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Yony Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Hi, I have two questions about VLANs on FreeBSD 6.3/7.0. 1. I'm trying to understand whether HW VLAN filtering can be supported. Looking at the code I can't find a proper ioctl that will inform the driver about a vlan creation/destruction. Is there a way of doing it? 2. Second issue - is there way of enabling TSO on vlan interfaces? Thanks Yony ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Don't buy AMD products (was Re: Xorg and ATI card query.)
On 3/13/07, Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 02:58:34PM -0500, Nikolas Britton wrote: We need to start hounding on AMD to publish the developer documentation for all radeon chipsets. I for one will not buy any AMD or ATI components until they decide to fix the problem. Here's the email address of AMD's president: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give him your two cents. Boycotting their hardware due to lack-of public developer docs is extreme but justified. Everyone has the right to do that if they desire. But in my opinion, mailing the president of AMD is really not the way to go about this. That methodology invites angry people sending him flames, which does nothing but destroy the image of a mature, reliable open-source community. Besides, chances are it's not Meyer who's making these decisions (re: proprietary hardware / NDA-only documentation), but a few select individuals at ATI who are fuelled off of paranoia (the most common defence being fear nVidia/other competitors will steal their technology). Really sounds like the decision of a legal dept. and not a CEO. Right, flaming never helps, but then I don't think the intention was to have anyone flame, 'raising awareness' is a better goal :) AMD has people that work on Linux (I interviewed with them some years back), maybe using that route to get to the decision makers? Cheers, Jack ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
