> On 04 Aug 2017, at 19:42, Ben RUBSON wrote:
>
> Feel free to ask me whatever you need to investigate on this !
> I let this (production :/) server in this state to have a chance to get
> interesting traces.
Server no more in production, I moved service to the standby node.
So we can do everyt
> On 04 Aug 2017, at 19:45, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
> On 08/04/17 19:42, Ben RUBSON wrote:
>>> On 04 Aug 2017, at 19:31, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>>
>>> On 08/04/17 19:13, Ben RUBSON wrote:
12 100029 intr swi4: clock (0) tcp_tw_2msl_scan pfslowtimo
softclock_
On 08/04/17 19:42, Ben RUBSON wrote:
On 04 Aug 2017, at 19:31, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On 08/04/17 19:13, Ben RUBSON wrote:
12 100029 intr swi4: clock (0) tcp_tw_2msl_scan pfslowtimo
softclock_call_cc softclock intr_event_execute_handlers ithread_loop fork_exit
fork_tra
> On 04 Aug 2017, at 19:31, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
> On 08/04/17 19:13, Ben RUBSON wrote:
>>12 100029 intr swi4: clock (0) tcp_tw_2msl_scan pfslowtimo
>> softclock_call_cc softclock intr_event_execute_handlers ithread_loop
>> fork_exit fork_trampoline
>
> Hi,
>
> Can y
On 08/04/17 19:13, Ben RUBSON wrote:
12 100029 intr swi4: clock (0) tcp_tw_2msl_scan pfslowtimo
softclock_call_cc softclock intr_event_execute_handlers ithread_loop fork_exit
fork_trampoline
Hi,
Can you "procstat -ak" a few times and grep for swi4. If the entry above
does n
> On 04 Aug 2017, at 19:02, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>
> On 08/04/17 18:59, Ben RUBSON wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Not sure this is the right list, but as it seems related to a mlx4en
>> device...
>> # vmstat -i 1
>> (...)
>> interrupt total rate
>> cpu23:timer
On 08/04/17 18:59, Ben RUBSON wrote:
Hello,
Not sure this is the right list, but as it seems related to a mlx4en device...
# vmstat -i 1
(...)
interrupt total rate
cpu23:timer 1198 1127
# top -P ALL
(...)
CPU 23: 0.0% user, 0.0% ni
Hello,
Not sure this is the right list, but as it seems related to a mlx4en device...
# vmstat -i 1
(...)
interrupt total rate
cpu23:timer 1198 1127
# top -P ALL
(...)
CPU 23: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 100% interrupt, 0.0
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221146
Matt Joras changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjo...@freebsd.org
--- Comment #12 fr
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221146
--- Comment #11 from Konrad ---
Yes, its reproducible. I change lagg configuration in rc.conf and reboot
machine.
if lagg0 will start with "ix1 flags=0" ix1 will have always "no carrier" even
if I remove from laggport. Manually removed ix1
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221146
--- Comment #10 from Andrey V. Elsukov ---
(In reply to Konrad from comment #9)
> I set LAGG on igb0 and igb1 and seems to be ok:
> but when ix's ports are configured as lagg1, all laggports work properly.
> When I switch ix's ports as lag
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221146
--- Comment #9 from Konrad ---
I set LAGG on igb0 and igb1 and seems to be ok:
lagg0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500
options=6403bb
ether 00:1e:67:27:1d:5e
inet 192.168.202.254 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.202
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221137
--- Comment #6 from ig...@speechpro.com ---
Created attachment 185012
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=185012&action=edit
New patch for rev 322037. Uses net.inet.ip.redirect as condition to use
ip_tryforward()
I hav
13 matches
Mail list logo
