[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 Lev A. Serebryakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|Open|In Progress -- You are recei

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #43 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Eric Joyner from comment #36) Yess! It helps em0 to pass all my torture tests (when I comment out this "optimization" twice, for lem and em). I can not test on igb now, but belive

[Bug 232142] Chelsio T520-SO cxgbe driver no longer recognized as 10Gb

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232142 Navdeep Parhar changed: What|Removed |Added CC||n...@freebsd.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug 232142] Chelsio T520-SO cxgbe driver no longer recognized as 10Gb

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232142 Mark Linimon changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Chelsio T520-SO cxgbe |Chelsio T520-SO cxgbe

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #42 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Eric Joyner from comment #36) Looks like it helps. Simple traffic with INVARIANTS works, now I'm testing IPsec configuration. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the ass

Re: DNS KSK rollover, local_unbound and 11.2-STABLE

Eugene Grosbein writes: > It seems that 11.2-STABLE still has old unbound version 1.5.10 having > no option trust-anchor-signaling. > > Can it be a reason that my home router running stable/11 r338011 as > NanoBSD with stock local_unbound > as DNS recursive service for LAN stopped working today?

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #41 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Lev A. Serebryakov from comment #39) OOPS! Looks like I patched only "lem" but not "em" function! Let's try to patch "em" too... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #40 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- One additional datapoint: when mtu=1500 on both ends, everything works for tens of minutes, but sending part (11.2-STABLE based) shows bursts of "resends", which is not occurs with mtu=9000 till c

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #39 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Eric Joyner from comment #36) Nope, commenting out "budget == 1" section in em_txrx.c (lines 556-560) doesn't help. Same assertion was triggered. -- You are receiving this mail bec

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #38 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Eric Joyner from comment #36) I can not reproduce it with mtu=1500 on both ends for 20 minutes. I'm trying to comment out "budget == 1" case for em(8). -- You are receiving this ma

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #37 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Eric Joyner from comment #36) Maybe. I'm using mtu 9000 in my tests… I could try to reproduce it with standard mtu (1500). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assign

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 Eric Joyner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||e...@freebsd.org --- Comment #36 fro

[Bug 231659] [em][igb] 12-ALPHA8 r339259 crashes on receive under load

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 --- Comment #35 from Lev A. Serebryakov --- (In reply to Lev A. Serebryakov from comment #34) iperf3 -c -R -t 3600 -P 32 "-P 32", not "--nstreams 32", as we speak TCP, not SCTP here. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the

Re: Reproducible crash in em/igb

On 10/12/18 7:29 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > > I have reproducible crash in igb and em driver on CURRENT, with KASSERT > violation if kernel is built INVARIANTS. > > All information is here: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 > > (please, start from newest comment

Reproducible crash in em/igb

I have reproducible crash in igb and em driver on CURRENT, with KASSERT violation if kernel is built INVARIANTS. All information is here: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231659 (please, start from newest comments, as first ones gives wrong interpretation). I can not reprod

Re: Deadlock in VLAN 12-current w/patch

On 10/8/18 5:36 PM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: Hi Matthew, There is a deadlock when destroying VLANs after the epoch changes were made. Can you have a look and consider the attached patch for 12-current? Thank you! Hi, Differential review is here: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D17496 --HPS

[Bug 221146] [ixgbe] Problem with second laggport

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221146 Maciej Suszko changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mac...@suszko.eu --- Comment #23 f

DNS KSK rollover, local_unbound and 11.2-STABLE

Hi! It seems that 11.2-STABLE still has old unbound version 1.5.10 having no option trust-anchor-signaling. Can it be a reason that my home router running stable/11 r338011 as NanoBSD with stock local_unbound as DNS recursive service for LAN stopped working today? The box has r/o root partitio