Oh, didn't realize you were running the lem code :) Will make the changes
shortly,
thanks for your debugging efforts.
Jack
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 2:29 AM, Mikolaj Golub to.my.troc...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:40:03 +0300 Mikolaj Golub wrote:
MG Hi,
MG Today I have
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 09:17:07AM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 07:07 PM 4/8/2010, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:06:09PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
Only one device support by em does multiqueue right
Brandon,
Did the checkin of yesterday afternoon resolve the problem of the win7
systems in
VirtualBox? I will continue to look at this today.
Jack
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:29 AM, Brandon Gooch
jamesbrandongo...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net
Mike, I noticed this connection is only 100Mb, that isn't accidental? And,
is it possible for
you to check a connection at 1Gb and see if the watchdogs don't happen.
My test engineer is running this code, and we are having trouble repro'ing
the issue, so any
clues might help. Is the kernel 64 or
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Brandon Gooch
jamesbrandongo...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Mike, I noticed this connection is only 100Mb, that isn't accidental?
And,
is it possible for
you to check a connection at 1Gb and see
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Brandon Gooch
jamesbrandongo...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Brandon Gooch
jamesbrandongo...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo
, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net wrote:
At 12:52 PM 4/8/2010, Jack Vogel wrote:
Mike, I noticed this connection is only 100Mb, that isn't accidental? And,
is it possible for
you to check a connection at 1Gb and see if the watchdogs don't happen.
My test engineer is running
LOL, what timing :)
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 10:46:22AM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
OK, some more data... It seems dhclient is getting upset as well
since the updated driver
Apr 8 10:28:37 ich10 dhclient[1383]:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 10:46:22AM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
OK, some more data... It seems dhclient is getting upset as well
since the updated driver
Apr 8 10:28:37 ich10 dhclient[1383]: DHCPDISCOVER on em0 to
You know, I'm wondering if the so-called ALTQ fix, which makes the TX
start always queue is causing the problem on that side?
Jack
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08
Bigger question is will it fix Brandon's VirtualBox issue??
Jack
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net wrote:
At 02:17 PM 4/8/2010, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
Try this patch. It should fix the issue. It seems Jack forgot to
strip CRC bytes as old em(4) didn't strip it,
Try the code I just checked in, it puts in the CRC stripping, but also
tweaks the
TX code, this may resolve the watchdogs. Let me know.
Cheers,
Jack
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 11:27:10AM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
You know
Only one device support by em does multiqueue right now, and that is
Hartwell, 82574.
Jack
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net wrote:
At 04:56 PM 4/8/2010, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:31:18PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 02:17 PM 4/8/2010, Pyun
, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:06:09PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
Only one device support by em does multiqueue right now, and that is
Hartwell, 82574.
Thanks for the info.
Mike, here is updated patch. Now UDP bulk TX transfer performance
recovered a lot
I need a bit more context Nick. Is this a card that has been non-problematic
on older releases and just showed a problem with 8.0 REL?
Regards,
Jack
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Thomas Hurst tom.hu...@clara.net wrote:
* Jack Vogel (jfvo...@gmail.com) wrote:
Its using MSI? Given
Its using MSI? Given that its PCI-X I have no idea how robust MSI is,
how bout you compile it with that disabled, use legacy IRQ and see
if that makes any diff.
Using TSO on anything pre-PCI Express is a bad idea, probably why
its gotten a bad rep in the em driver.
I have a driver in the works
The failure to setup receive structures means it did not have sufficient
mbufs
to setup the RX ring and buffer structs. Not sure why this results in a
lockup,
but try and increase kern.ipc.nmbclusters.
Let me know what happens,
Jack
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Willem Jan Withagen
Hmmm, not sure what changes are in this, what if you use the 8.0 REL
driver, does it still happen?
Regards,
Jack
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Ivan Voras ivo...@freebsd.org wrote:
Ivan Voras wrote:
I have a fairly recent 8-stable machine running under VMWare ESXi 3.5
(amd64 guest),
Yes, my bad, its going to get MFC'd soon... The driver in HEAD
will work on 8 BTW.
Jack
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 02:47:16AM +0100, Christof Schulze wrote:
Hello world,
I also have a board with the H55 chipset (see
So apparently this thing needs no special knowledge in the driver, yet
something in
the new code breaks it, can someone explain tersely how the altq app
actually
pokes or hooks up to the driver? I am not clear about that and I suspect
if I was
this would all be clearer.
Jack
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010
February 2010 18:48:02 Jack Vogel wrote:
So apparently this thing needs no special knowledge in the driver, yet
something in
the new code breaks it, can someone explain tersely how the altq app
actually
pokes or hooks up to the driver? I am not clear about that and I
suspect if I
LOL, and I can answer my own question, I just looked and the ONLY
1Gig drivers using multiqueue are mine, so I guess not eh? :)
J.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Max, yes, i've done some digging myself and now see how things
work, the rubber meets
.
Right now the inserted code looks solid enough to me, so somehow I think
its not being defined.
Jack
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Pyun YongHyeon pyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 01:41:01PM -0800, Jack Vogel wrote:
LOL, and I can answer my own question, I just looked
Just teseted, and at least in the kernel build I'm doing its definitely
defining
that code on, hit my syntax error rebuilding em.
Jack
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
It should never get to the drbr code, look at net/if_var.h, in the inline
definition
AM, Marco van Tol ma...@tols.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:16:02AM -0800, Jack Vogel wrote:
I am investigating it, and have a suspicion about what's going on, you
can
assist in verifying my suspicion. In if_em.c search for
em_setup_vlan_hw,
you will find a compile time option
information regarding this would be appreciated. Thanks.
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
No need, I set it up and tried it, and I was right, it does not fail if
that
routine is not used. The interesting thing is that the igb driver, which
has the same code, works
I am investigating it, and have a suspicion about what's going on, you can
assist in verifying my suspicion. In if_em.c search for em_setup_vlan_hw,
you will find a compile time option that uses that only if FreeBSD_version
is 700029, hack the code however you wish so that it uses the OLD way
No, it hasn't, I need time to look it over and be convinced of what he was
doing.
Jack
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Nick Rogers ncrog...@gmail.com wrote:
looks like the patch mentioned in kern/141843 has not been applied to the
tree?
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Nick Rogers
?
Regards,
Jack
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
No, it hasn't, I need time to look it over and be convinced of what he was
doing.
Jack
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Nick Rogers ncrog...@gmail.com wrote:
looks like the patch mentioned in kern/141843 has
:00AM -0800, Jack Vogel wrote:
I've tried this patch, and it completely breaks IPv6 offloads, which DO
work
btw,
our testers have a netperf stress test that does both ipv4 and ipv6, and
that test
fails 100% after this change.
I could go hacking at it myself but as its your code Pyun
...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:22:01PM -0800, Jack Vogel wrote:
Well, what our testers do is assign BOTH an ipv4 and ipv6 address to an
interface,
then netperf runs over both, I don't know the internal details but I
assume
both TCP
and UDP are going over ipv6.
Prior to your
-0800, alan bryan wrote:
I did some searching last night and found others using igb on Intel
Cards having high interrupts and other strange issues and some comments to
the effect that igb is soon going to have a lot of work done to it (I
believe Jack Vogel is working on it). So, can someone
The 82573, when onboard (LOM) is usually special, it is used by system
management
firmware. Go to the system BIOS and turn off management, see if that
eliminates the
periodic hang.
Jack
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org wrote:
John Nielsen j...@jnielsen.net wrote
wrote:
Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote
in 2a41acea0911301119j1449be58y183f2fe1d1112...@mail.gmail.com:
jf I will look into this Hiroki, as time goes the older hardware does not
jf always
jf get test cycles like one might wish.
Thanks! Please let me know if you need more information
, but wanted you to know that I
have reproduced this.
Jack
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
We've run into a snag on this problem. The 82547 is a LOM only interface
and my validation engineer has only found two old systems that have it,
and neither of them
I will look into this Hiroki, as time goes the older hardware does not
always
get test cycles like one might wish.
Jack
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org wrote:
Hi,
I noticed that network connection of one of my boxes got
significantly slow just after
Cool, so stable/7 will just need to be updated :) I need to catch up all the
drivers in that stream actually.
Thanks for testing!!
Jack
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Mike Tancsa m...@sentex.net wrote:
At 07:29 PM 11/18/2009, Jack Vogel wrote:
Hey Mike,
Can you check if you see
Hey Mike,
Can you check if you see the same behavior on RELENG 8?
There is a systemic problem having to do with when to enable interrupts that
might be behind this. The em driver does not enable them until
em_init_locked(),
this is because until then its not ready to deal with a TX or RX
system and its kin do not exhibit the symptom under 6.3-RELEASE-p13. The
symptoms appear under freebsd-updated 7.2-RELEASE GENERIC kernel with no
tuning.
Previously, we've been using DCGDIS.EXE (from Jack Vogel) for this
symptom. The first system to be repurposed accepts DCGDIS
LOL, glad the problem has been resolved, and no thanks, I do not need
to pursue this any further.
I also want to thank Jeremy for his help and data!!
Thanks guys and good evening,
Jack
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Royce Williams royce.willi...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at
and I'll see if that helps. I have
a feeling that isn't related to the NIC at all, but I'm not sure what
else to try.
Rudy
Jack Vogel wrote:
Watchdog resets the adapter. Messing with these values is of dubious
value
anyway.
Jack
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Rudy cra
in the future.
Jack
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Daniel Bond d...@danielbond.org wrote:
Hi Jack,
I'll comment your mail inline:
On Oct 5, 2009, at 6:57 PM, Jack Vogel wrote:
This posting just muddies the issue, first you talk about having a problem
that
involves Broadcom, ok, so post
Hmmm, I did have one of the drivers print more info at watchdog time, but I
just looked
and that's not em, time to add that I guess.
Since you're in the driver there isn't a huge amount of info that you can
print, it still
may not be enough to help.
BTW, I've always been somewhat dissatisfied
Watchdog resets the adapter. Messing with these values is of dubious value
anyway.
Jack
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Rudy cra...@monkeybrains.net wrote:
I noticed something interesting.
I set the rc_int_delay to 0:
sysctl dev.em.5.rx_int_delay=0
Chcking via sysctl dev.em.5.debug=1
I would say that 1024 should be enough, I thought maybe you were at 256.
amd64 kernels just perform better at a lot of things, however I/O is not
necessarily
one of them, so I wouldn't claim it for sure, still I'd always default to 64
bit these
days unless there's some other reason not to.
What
Increase the size of your TX ring, meaning the number of TX descriptors.
You said this is a quad port card, what size PCI E slot are you in? On
some motherboards slot connectors might suggest its of a certain size
but its not really wired fully. If you are not in a x8 lane slot move it to
one.
There is no such beast, I assume you mean a DP45SG?
http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/motherboards/DP45SG/DP45SG-overview.htm
So, what kind of disk, what kind of CD, I have one of these systems at home,
I don't
happen to run FreeBSD on it, but I could do a test install tonight and
check.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:00 AM, David Peall da...@esn.org.za wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, David Peall wrote:
I found the following:
http://blog.elitecoderz.net/freebsd-freezes-on-trying-to-mount-root-f
rom-ufsdevmd0-and-is-stucked/2009/01/
Which suggests disabling USB2 I don't seem
resolve any of these issues customers are still seeing.
Cheers everyone,
Jack Vogel
Intel Lan Access Division
free...@intel.com
ESB2_problems.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
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:
Greg,
I have another report of this problem, and I have a patch for you to try
out, will
be sending it out a bit later today.
Jack
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Greg Byshenk free...@byshenk.net wrote:
I have one machine that is seeing watchdog timeouts on em0, running
7-STABLE
amd64 as
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:21 PM, pluknet pluk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi.
2009/2/12 Greg Rivers
gcr+freebsd-sta...@tharned.orggcr%2bfreebsd-sta...@tharned.org
:
I'm trying to light an Intel 10GbE adapter in an HP DL380 G5 using very
recent 7.1-STABLE amd64 with GENERIC kernel. I expected
2009, Jack Vogel wrote:
Yes, its an Oplin, 82598, it uses my ixgbe driver rather than ixgb.
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Kip Macy wrote:
see ixgbe(4)
I saw ixgbe in the source tree and would have tried it, but I found that no
kernel module is built for ixgbe on RELENG_7. Neither is the device
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:02 AM, Mars G Miro s...@anarchy.in.the.ph wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Mars G Miro s...@anarchy.in.the.ph
wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:33 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I am at Intel you know, and even we don't seem to have any systems
I have not seen a problem like this ever, what is the link partner
of each NIC and if you switch the ports what happens?
We have Nehalem's in the validation lab but I have not had an
excuse to install on one so far, I guess now I do :)
Jack
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:16 AM, Mars G Miro
group had an encounter with one
like yours, I have two managers looking for me, hopefully I can find one.
Jack
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Mars G Miro s...@anarchy.in.the.ph wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:33 AM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, I am at Intel you know, and even
Anyone running 7.1 and using E1000 hardware that has the time, I would
appreciate
any testing you can do. This has an important fix for SuperMicro servers but
any
regression test of the code would be helpful.
The email was getting rejected due to the tarball size, so contact me and I
will send
Anyone running 7.1 and using E1000 hardware that has the time, I would
appreciate
any testing you can do. This has an important fix for SuperMicro servers but
any
regression test of the code would be helpful.
Backup the contents of /usr/src/sys/dev/e1000 and then overwrite with this
tarball.
promiscuous mode
Twiddling dev.fxp.0.noflow
The link status looks fine, but the card will not send or receive traffic.
A warm reboot was enough to get things back up again.
regards,
BMS
Adding Jack Vogel, who's responsible for fxp(4).
--
| Jeremy Chadwick
or the Linux driver has a way to bring it back
out of that state.
Until this gets worked out all I can tell you is keep that cable
IN :)
Jack
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 4:33 AM, Markus Vervier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jack Vogel wrote:
| I have
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Markus Vervier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote:
I didn't mean the NIC EEPROM, but the system BIOS, make sure you are
running the version that Jeremy said he was, if that matches you might go
look at settings in the BIOS that are about management
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Jack Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Markus Vervier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote:
I didn't mean the NIC EEPROM, but the system BIOS, make sure you are
running the version that Jeremy said he was, if that matches
of scripts that get
postinstalled you need to
be ready to make this change.
How can you tell if you have such a device: Simple, use pciconf, there
are only 3 ID's
that are effected: 0x10A7, 0x10A9, and 0x10D6.
If you have questions feel free to email me.
Cheers,
Jack Vogel
Intel Lan Access
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jack. Will the em driver ever support the multiple hardware queues of
the 82571 or are we just stuck with the standard em driver?
Has there been any significant change in the em driver itself ?
I have a feeling that the 82571
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 08:19:46AM +, Josh Paetzel wrote:
On Friday 08 August 2008 06:31:24 pm Jack Vogel wrote:
OK, I just got access to a machine, am going to install and see if I
can repro this
this afternoon
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Markus Vervier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote:
Seems possibly a BIOS thing, if not that bad cable, bad link partner
maybe??
I had the problem with all sorts of switches / cables. How can I dump my
EEPROM settings if that helps?
I didn't mean
me too 's are of little help. Please elaborate on your exact same, since
each person's perception will be slightly different.
So far I have heard nothing that sounds like a driver issue.
Jack
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 5:50 AM, Markus Vervier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I just stumbled upon
OK, I just got access to a machine, am going to install and see if I
can repro this
this afternoon.
Jack
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Markus Vervier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel schrieb:
me too 's are of little help. Please elaborate on your exact same,
since
each person's
The focus here on the laptop distracted me, but someone else at work
reminded me. Its very important that you run the EEPROM fix for
the 82573 that i posted a long while back, search in email archive
for it. Its a DOS executable that will patch your EEPROM.
I am not sure if the Lenova's need it,
Thanks for the pointer Royce, and yes that's the issue, and if you want
to boot Linux and use that instead of DOS then more power to you.
Cheers,
Jack
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Royce Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote, on 8/4/2008 9:18 AM:
The focus here on the laptop
] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote, on 8/4/2008 9:54 AM:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Royce Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote, on 8/4/2008 9:18 AM:
The focus here on the laptop distracted me, but someone else at work
reminded me. Its very important that you run the EEPROM fix
:
Jack Vogel wrote, on 8/4/2008 9:18 AM:
The focus here on the laptop distracted me, but someone else at work
reminded me. Its very important that you run the EEPROM fix for
the 82573 that i posted a long while back, search in email archive
for it. Its a DOS executable that will patch your
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 09:24:53 -0700
Jack Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the poster gives me EXACT hardware list I will see about repro'ing the
problem inhouse. We do not do much of anything with laptops but I
will see. Oh
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 12:55:53 +0200
Torfinn Ingolfsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to be sure: also if the first command you try on the interface is
'ifconfig up'?
Hello Torfinn,
good point, no. The problem appears when the
? If
you attach it later, after boot up, the interface won't power up and appear
in the interface list (ifconfig)?
The card range supported by the if_em driver is huge, so it wouldn't be
surprising if this is a hardware bug affecting a relatively narrow line of
parts. I've added Jack Vogel
Oh, so the problem is if igb alone is defined?
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:53:16 -0700,
Jack Vogel wrote:
Just guessing, did someone change conf/files maybe??
If you build a STABLE kernel with igb AND em then things work
OK, will put on my todo list :)
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:07:22 -0700,
Jack Vogel wrote:
Oh, so the problem is if igb alone is defined?
Yes.
Best,
George
___
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Just guessing, did someone change conf/files maybe??
Jack
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 2:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Howdy,
As of today, this afternoon, I see the following:
linking kernel.debug
e1000_api.o(.text+0xad9): In function `e1000_setup_init_funcs':
Yes, I guess the time has arrived to add igb into GENERIC, I
would add into your kernel config now, I will add into the tree
at my next opportunity.
As for that failure on igb1, try building in the kernel and see
if that still happens, that one I have not seen.
Cheers,
Jack
On Mon, Jul 7,
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Pyun YongHyeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 09:51:53AM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
This is a small patch that Sam came up with for me, it will allow
drivers to know
when a vlan attaches.
It is transparent to any code that doesn't
This is a small patch that Sam came up with for me, it will allow
drivers to know
when a vlan attaches.
It is transparent to any code that doesn't want to change, but this
will allow my
drivers to finally utilize the vlan hardware filter (something Linux has had for
ever but we lacked).
My test
On 6/10/08, Jack Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a small patch that Sam came up with for me, it will allow
drivers to know
when a vlan attaches.
It is transparent to any code that doesn't want to change, but this
will allow my
drivers to finally utilize the vlan hardware filter
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Daniel Ponticello [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
i'm experiencing periodic kernel panics on a server with FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE
#0: Tue May 20 19:09:43 CEST 2008.
My big problem is that the system is not performing memory dumping and/or
automatic reoboot,
it
On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 2:13 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip discussion]
Sorry to all for the noise, turns out that with a motherboard BIOS update
the card is recognized and initialized fine.
For the archives the board was an Asus P5B-VM DO and had the 0505 BIOS. I
updated to the
I got the new drivers in Friday afternoon for those that don't see CVS
messages.
The igb driver is for 82575 and 82576 adapters, it has multiqueue support and
MSIX, there will be more server type enhancements in that driver as I get the
time.
The em driver now will be client oriented, the latest
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Kostik Belousov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:14:32AM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
I got the new drivers in Friday afternoon for those that don't see CVS
messages.
The igb driver is for 82575 and 82576 adapters, it has multiqueue
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Scott Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote:
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Kostik Belousov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:14:32AM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
I got the new drivers in Friday afternoon for those
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Ben Stuyts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17 apr 2008, at 16:11, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 02:02:51PM +0200, Ben Stuyts wrote:
On 17 apr 2008, at 13:20, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 06:32:32PM +0900, [EMAIL
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Holger Kipp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 09:50:16AM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
more details below. as it currently is, polling seems to do
the trick, however handling several em-interfaces with the
same irq (mind you, it is pci)
On Dec 24, 2007 5:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just got a new Intel Gb PCIe network card and installed it today. The
card is seen by the system but the driver fails to initialize it with the
error seen in the email subject.
I'm running FreeBSD RELENG_7 from around BETA3 but can upgrade
On Dec 1, 2007 8:32 PM, Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I am doing some work for a company that recently bought 2 systems based
on the above motherboard and mostly they work fine, however on boot
just before userland starts they stall for about a minute. (Just after
it starts the
On Nov 29, 2007 11:21 PM, Vitezslav Novy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
my configuration is
kernel GENERIC
em0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=18bRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4
ether 00:19:d1:0f:1c:18
inet
On Nov 30, 2007 1:03 AM, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack Vogel wrote:
On Nov 29, 2007 11:21 PM, Vitezslav Novy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
my configuration is
kernel GENERIC
em0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options
On Nov 15, 2007 1:11 PM, Jack Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 15, 2007 12:54 PM, Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, Jack.
You wrote 15 ?? 2007 ?., 23:52:36:
Have you tried this NIC on anything previously, an older release?
No... And I don't have spare computer
On Nov 15, 2007 7:17 AM, John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 13 October 2007 11:59:40 am Alson van der Meulen wrote:
* Jack Vogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-10-13 05:19]:
A suggestion, take the relevant files from my em driver and put
them back into the kernel tree
I was curious, is there any organized method to funnel new IDs into
the code or is it just willy nilly as a driver owner notices it?
I will be having some patches to add IDs from this bringup I've
been working on and wondered if there was a 'canonical' way to
make this stuff happen?
Cheers,
vmstat -i
Disconnect the cable from it when you boot, also pciconf -l
to see what type adapter it is.
This is storming before you assign it an address?
On Nov 15, 2007 11:18 AM, Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, freebsd-stable.
Upgrading my netwrok from 100Mbit to 1Gbit.
On Nov 15, 2007 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, Jack.
You wrote 15 ?? 2007 ?., 22:46:59:
(after loading drivers for my X100P Zaptel voice card, but it doesn't
change anything).
vmstat -i
interrupt total rate
irq0: clk
On Nov 15, 2007 12:45 PM, Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, Jack.
You wrote 15 ?? 2007 ?., 23:03:46:
sysctl hw.intr_storm_threshold
If I set this onw to 1, em0 generate 1001-1002 irq per second
(accroding to vmstat -i) without any storm messages :)
In this old
On Nov 15, 2007 12:54 PM, Lev Serebryakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello, Jack.
You wrote 15 ?? 2007 ?., 23:52:36:
Have you tried this NIC on anything previously, an older release?
No... And I don't have spare computer for such test :(
OK, then we really have no control in the
101 - 200 of 339 matches
Mail list logo
