82574L hangs (with r233708 e1000 driver).

[Barney Cordoba]

--- On Fri, 5/11/12, Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: 82574L hangs (with r233708 e1000 driver).
> To: "John Baldwin" <jhb at freebsd.org>, "Konstantin Belousov" <kostikbel at gmail.com>
> Cc: jfv at freebsd.org, "Jack Vogel" <jfvogel at gmail.com>, net at freebsd.org
> Date: Friday, May 11, 2012, 6:24 PM
> 
> 
> --- On Tue, 5/8/12, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: 82574L hangs (with r233708 e1000 driver).
> > To: "John Baldwin" <jhb at freebsd.org>
> > Cc: jfv at freebsd.org,
> "Jack Vogel" <jfvogel at gmail.com>,
> net at freebsd.org
> > Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2012, 4:24 AM
> > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 01:44:57PM
> > -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Friday, May 04, 2012 6:18:19 pm Konstantin
> Belousov
> > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 11:30:22AM -0400,
> John
> > Baldwin wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:21:21 pm
> > Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 09:38:49PM
> > +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at
> 12:19:39PM
> > -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, April 08,
> 2012
> > 1:11:25 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 07, 2012
> at
> > 04:22:07PM -0700, Jack Vogel wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Make sure you
> have
> > any firmware up to the latest available, if that 
> > > > > doesn't
> > > > > > > > > > help
> > > > > > > > > > let me know and
> I'll
> > check internally to see if there are any 
> > > > > outstanding
> > > > > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > > in shared
> > code,  that will be after the weekend.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > I had BIOS rev.
> 151,
> > after you hint I found rev. 154 on the site.
> > > > > > > > > Now BIOS reports
> itself
> > as MTCDT10N.86A.0154.2012.0323.1601,
> > > > > > > > > March 23.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Unfortunately,
> upgrade
> > did not changed anything in regard of hanging
> > > > > > > > > interface.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Does reverting 233708
> make any
> > difference?  Have you tried futzing 
> > > > > around with
> > > > > > > > kgdb when it is hung to
> see
> > what state the device is in (software state 
> > > > > at
> > > > > > > > least)?
> > > > > > > It does, in a sense that
> without
> > r233708 the interface becomes stuck
> > > > > > > almost immediately. I just
> upgraded
> > to the e1000 at r234154, which does not
> > > > > > > change much.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I fiddled with the adapter
> state
> > after the hang in kgdb more, and I
> > > > > > > noted something interesting.
> > Apparently, tx works. When I ping the remote
> > > > > > > host from my suffering atom
> > machine, remote host sees the packet. Also
> > > > > > > remote machine sees some udp
> > traffic originating from the tom, like
> > > > > > > ntp queries.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > And, on receive, the atom
> board
> > does receive interrupts, em0:rx 0 counter
> > > > > > > in vmstat -i increases. Even
> more
> > fun, the sysctl dev.em.0.debug
> > > > > > > shows increasing hw rdh (as I
> > understand, this is hardware 'last
> > > > > > > received' packet pointer for
> rx
> > ring). So I looked at the packet
> > > > > > > descriptor at hw rdt index,
> and
> > there I see
> > > > > > > (kgdb) p/x ((struct adapter
> > *)0xffffff80010e4000)->rx_rings->rx_base[78]
> > > > > > > $11 = {buffer_addr =
> 0x12a128800,
> > length = 0x5ea, csum = 0x3c2b, status = 
> > > > > 0x0, 
> > > > > > >   errors = 0x0,
> > special = 0x0}
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Apparently, the Descriptor
> Done bit
> > is clear, so the em_rxeof() function
> > > > > > > breaks from the loop, not
> consuming
> > the current packet. Also, it returns
> > > > > > > false due to DD bit clear.
> This
> > prevents em_msix_rx() from scheduling
> > > > > > > taskqueue for processing. So
> > apparent cause for the hang is missing
> > > > > > > DD bit in descriptor.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I am not sure isn't all this
> is
> > obvious for anybody who knows em
> > > > > > > internals, and were to go
> from
> > there.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Ok, nobody cares.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Below is the workaround I use to
> prevent
> > the interface wedging.
> > > > > > It seems that the sole PCI register
> read
> > (namely, the rx ring head read)
> > > > > > and consequent recheck of the
> descriptor
> > status greatly reduce the
> > > > > > likelihood of the issue.
> Unfortunately,
> > the read does not eliminate
> > > > > > the hang completely. So it is not
> some
> > PCIe coherency problem.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > With the patch applied, I am able
> to
> > copy around blu-ray images, while
> > > > > > previously the interface hang in
> 20-30
> > seconds of 100Mbit/s traffic.
> > > > > > Sometimes the messages are
> printed:
> > > > > > em0: Workaround: head 1018 tail
> 1002 cur
> > 1010
> > > > > > em0: Workaround: head 976 tail 973
> cur
> > 974
> > > > > > em0: Workaround: head 950 tail 939
> cur
> > 946
> > > > > > em0: Workaround: head 435 tail 419
> cur
> > 426
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Machine is still dead due to
> random
> > memory corruption which I see, in
> > > > > > particular, pmap sometimes read
> garbage
> > from PTEs. I have no idea is
> > > > > > it related to em0 rx descriptor
> missed
> > writes, or is a different issue.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Humm, so if I'm reading this correctly,
> the
> > card "skips" a receive
> > > > > descriptor and stores a packet at the
> next
> > descriptor?  That's just
> > > > > bizarre.
> > > > Either this, or it does store the packet but
> > 'forgots' to update the
> > > > rx descriptor. I think that your
> interpretation is
> > closer to reality,
> > > > since I get sustained 20MB/s over ssh with
> the
> > patch even when workaround
> > > > activates. The lost packets probably should
> cause
> > retransmit and speed
> > > > drop.
> > > 
> > > This is just weird.  I wonder if there is a
> known
> > errata for this?
> > > This really seems to be broken hardware and not a
> > driver issue.
> > I was not able to find anything even remotely
> resembling the
> > described
> > behaviour, in the publically available 82574L
> specification
> > update. I looked
> > at rev. 3.5, dated January 2012.
> > 
> > I may indeed give up and relocate the hardware into
> trash,
> > but it would be
> > pity, since this is new shiny Intel Atom 2800 m/b. I am
> not
> > sure I can give
> > convincing arguments to supplier for warranty
> replacement.
> > 
> > And, while I booted Debian to apply f/w fix Jack
> > recommended, I did
> > quick test and interface looked stable.
> > 
> > 
> 
> FWIW, I've got an X7SPE-HF-D525 MB with 82574L running on a
> 7.0 driver
> that seems to work pretty well. It panics once in a blue
> moon when we
> overload it (like 200Mb/s of traffic) but it generally works
> ok.
> 
> BC

Has anything been done or patched regarding this problem?

BC