On 2010/12/10 12:18, Brynet wrote: > Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Here's an attempt to fix a potential MCLGETI issue with vr(4) similar > > to what I recently fixed fro re(4). Unfortunately I don't have any > > vr(4) hardware myself, so I need some hep testing this. > > > > Things to look for are: > > > > 1. Does this diff have any effect on throughput (packets/s, bits/s). > > > > 2. Does this fix any problems with the interface if you blast it with > > packets? > > > > 3. Does livelock mitigation actualy work? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mark > > Hi Mark, > > Did you receive any feedback for this? is there an easy way to replicate > the problems others are seeing, as my systems seem stable.
i was hoping to have tested this already but i just had to burn the couple of hours i had "spare" on getting some ipsec boxes to start talking to each other again. maybe next week. to replicate, on a fast nearby machine: pkg_add netrate netblast ip.addr.of.vr 1234 5 10 i typically saw hangs in a fraction of a second on a vr/geode system. to recover connect in on another nic or the console and ifconfig vrX down then ifconfig vrX up.
