Jeff Blank wrote:
> I wrote:
>> I've just upgraded a 7.1-REL server to 8.0-REL and have lost my
>> ability to use vlan(4) on top of lagg(4) on top of em(4).
A workaround for this is to disable hardware vlan tagging:
# ifconfig em0 -vlanhwtag
(don't forget to do all em interfaces and put it in rc
I wrote:
> I've just upgraded a 7.1-REL server to 8.0-REL and have lost my
> ability to use vlan(4) on top of lagg(4) on top of em(4).
I should have mentioned that I'm using lagg failover. I can reproduce
my problem in single-user as follows:
# ifconfig em0 up
# ifconfig em1 up
# ifconfig lagg0
I've just upgraded a 7.1-REL server to 8.0-REL and have lost my
ability to use vlan(4) on top of lagg(4) on top of em(4). (Not sure
about other interface types, just encountered the problem tonight.)
Using tcpdump, I see that I can receive 802.1q-tagged traffic (and on
the correct VLAN interface),
On Friday 07 May 2004 03:08 pm, Scott Long wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 May 2004 04:47 pm, Scott Long wrote:
> >>Søren Schmidt wrote:
> >>>Petri Helenius wrote:
> I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
> with broken BIOS. I suspect you get a
John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday 06 May 2004 04:47 pm, Scott Long wrote:
Søren Schmidt wrote:
Petri Helenius wrote:
I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
Nope. no messages to that effect, oh an
On Thursday 06 May 2004 04:47 pm, Scott Long wrote:
> Søren Schmidt wrote:
> > Petri Helenius wrote:
> >> I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
> >> with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
> >
> > Nope. no messages to that effect, oh a
Scott Long wrote:
I'm looking a t a similar system right now and it definitely looks
like an interrupt routing problem, not a driver problem. The
interesting thing is that (with 5.2-current as of two days ago)
disabling neither
ACPI nor APIC helps. I guess that we might want to get John Baldw
Søren Schmidt wrote:
Petri Helenius wrote:
I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
Nope. no messages to that effect, oh and it works in windows(tm)...
The last thing I see if I try to use em0 is:
On 06-May-2004 Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Søren Schmidt wrote:
>>
>> Andre Oppermann wrote:
>> > What MIIPHY does the card have?
>>
>> No idea, builtin of sorts, there is no mention of it in the probe, and
>> no HW to see on the boards. I have two different boards with these on
>> them both show th
Andre Oppermann wrote:
>
> Søren Schmidt wrote:
> >
> > Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > > Søren Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> > >>Petri Helenius wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
> > >>>with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when boot
Søren Schmidt wrote:
Nope. no messages to that effect, oh and it works in windows(tm)...
The last thing I see if I try to use em0 is:
em0: Link is up 100 Mbps Full Duplex
and then the system locks up hard.
Would you mind posting full dmesg output?
Pete
_
Søren Schmidt wrote:
Petri Helenius wrote:
I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
Nope. no messages to that effect, oh and it works in windows(tm)...
The last thing I see if I try to use em0 is:
Søren Schmidt wrote:
>
> Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > Søren Schmidt wrote:
> >
> >>Petri Helenius wrote:
> >>
> >>>I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
> >>>with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
> >>
> >>Nope. no messages to that eff
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Søren Schmidt wrote:
Petri Helenius wrote:
I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
Nope. no messages to that effect, oh and it works in windows(tm)...
The last thing I see if
Søren Schmidt wrote:
>
> Petri Helenius wrote:
> > I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
> > with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
>
> Nope. no messages to that effect, oh and it works in windows(tm)...
>
> The last thing I see if
Petri Helenius wrote:
I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
Nope. no messages to that effect, oh and it works in windows(tm)...
The last thing I see if I try to use em0 is:
em0: Link is up 100 M
I´m highly confident that this is a case of integrated "CSA" ethernet
with broken BIOS. I suspect you get an message about that when booting.
Pete
Søren Schmidt wrote:
John Polstra wrote:
On 05-May-2004 Søren Schmidt wrote:
For what its worth I have problems with one em based interface as
well,
I cannot boot the system with em0 after FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p3..
it did work with 5.2-RELEASE-p1, though.
See: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=65282
One month is over since I submitted the pr, but nobody has
looked at it yet.
Stefan Bethke wrote:
Am 05.05.2004 um 13:31 schrieb Søren Sc
Am 05.05.2004 um 13:31 schrieb Søren Schmidt:
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 12:42:48PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
+> Hi.
+> +> I've problems with em(4) and IPSEC/FAST_IPSEC and TCP_STREAM
netperf test.
+> While running netperf tests between two FreeBSD machines directly
On 05-May-2004 Søren Schmidt wrote:
> John Polstra wrote:
>> Are either of the IRQs (10 and 19) shared with other devices?
>
> Yes, the working one is shared with an (unused) USB port
I was hoping the failing IRQ would be shared. So much for that
idea. :-)
John
_
John Polstra wrote:
On 05-May-2004 Søren Schmidt wrote:
For what its worth I have problems with one em based interface as well,
it locks the machine solid when used:
em0: port
0xb000-0xb01f mem 0xfb10-0xfb11 irq 10 at device 1.0 on pci1
em0: Reserved 0x2 bytes for rid 0x10 type 3 at
On 05-May-2004 Søren Schmidt wrote:
> For what its worth I have problems with one em based interface as well,
> it locks the machine solid when used:
>
> em0: port
> 0xb000-0xb01f mem 0xfb10-0xfb11 irq 10 at device 1.0 on pci1
> em0: Reserved 0x2 bytes for rid 0x10 type 3 at 0xfb100
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 12:42:48PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
+> Hi.
+>
+> I've problems with em(4) and IPSEC/FAST_IPSEC and TCP_STREAM netperf test.
+> While running netperf tests between two FreeBSD machines directly connected
+> em0 goes down once every few min
On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 12:42:48PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
+> Hi.
+>
+> I've problems with em(4) and IPSEC/FAST_IPSEC and TCP_STREAM netperf test.
+> While running netperf tests between two FreeBSD machines directly connected
+> em0 goes down once every few minutes and I've no idea why.
Hi.
I've problems with em(4) and IPSEC/FAST_IPSEC and TCP_STREAM netperf test.
While running netperf tests between two FreeBSD machines directly connected
em0 goes down once every few minutes and I've no idea why.
Without IPSEC everything works just fine, with IPSEC/FAST_IPSEC it also
works fine b
25 matches
Mail list logo
