Re: HEADS UP: call for nve(4) users to test a patch

Just a followup after a few days to confirm that I'm
still seeing the same thing - it now goes to "63" and
then networking (nve) dies - it does this about every
12 hours or so on my desktop machine with normal web
browsing as the main thing using networking. Is there
any way short of a reboot to "reset" the nve or am I
stuck rebooting this machine every 12 hours or so? 

Is there anything else that may work or anything else
you want to try? If not I'll have to find some other
network card as this rebooting is getting old fast.

Thanks again for trying!

--Alan



--- alan bryan <alanbryan1234_at_yahoo.com> wrote:

> Well, I tried it and it's still broken.  I patched
> and
> re-compiled last night (FreeBSD 6 beta 1).  The only
> change is that it didn't go to 64 before dying, it
> now
> died at 63 (whatever these numbers stand for).
> 
> For example from my demsg:
> nve0: device timeout (62)
> nve0: link state changed to DOWN
> nve0: link state changed to UP
> nve0: device timeout (63)
> nve0: link state changed to DOWN
> nve0: link state changed to UP
> 
> > ping 10.0.0.1
> PING 10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
> ping: sendto: No buffer space available
> ping: sendto: No buffer space available
> (10.0.0.1 is the gateway)
> 
> It lasted about 12 hours while slowly counting up to
> 63 before dying.
> 
> nForce 4 from the onboard nve in the Shuttle SN25P
> small form factor PC.
> 
> If you need anything else just let me know.
> 
> Thanks for trying!
> 
> --Alan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- Maxime Henrion <mux_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> > 	Hi,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > If any of you are using an nve(4) card and are
> > experiencing "device
> > timeout" errors, I'd like you to test a very
> simple
> > patch.  One person
> > already reported success with it, but I'd like to
> > see more reports
> > before committing and hopefully MFC'ing it in time
> > for 6.0-RELEASE.
> > 
> > This patch just reduces the size of the TX ring by
> > one.  Many NIC chips
> > in existence today have such bugs and require
> > similar fixes, so I'm not
> > really surprised.  It also seems Linux's forcedeth
> > driver does such a
> > thing, but it's hard to tell because it uses an
> > entirely different API
> > than us.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Maxime
> > > ? nve.patch
> > Index: if_nvereg.h
> >
>
===================================================================
> > RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/dev/nve/if_nvereg.h,v
> > retrieving revision 1.3
> > diff -u -r1.3 if_nvereg.h
> > --- if_nvereg.h	10 Jun 2005 16:49:12 -0000	1.3
> > +++ if_nvereg.h	12 Sep 2005 17:21:21 -0000
> > _at__at_ -49,9 +49,9 _at__at_
> >  
> >  #define	NV_RID		0x10
> >  
> > -#define	TX_RING_SIZE	64
> > +#define	TX_RING_SIZE	63
> >  #define	RX_RING_SIZE	64
> > -#define	NV_MAX_FRAGS	63
> > +#define	NV_MAX_FRAGS	62
> >  
> >  #define	FCS_LEN 4
> >  
> > > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> >
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com