trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode on 8.0-RELEASE (possibly bge(4) related)

[Pyun YongHyeon]

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:13:59PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:06:47PM -0800, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > dev.bge.1.stats.rx.Fragments: 1
> > 
> > You received a frame that is less than 64 bytes with a bad FCS.
> > 
> > > dev.bge.1.stats.rx.UcastPkts: 2956515
> > > dev.bge.1.stats.rx.MulticastPkts: 0
> > > dev.bge.1.stats.rx.FCSErrors: 18
> > 
> > You have a lot of FCS errors here.
> > Please double check cabling. If the statistics counter is right,
> > sender is guilty or you have bad cabling issues here.
> 
> 1. lost packets much more 18. I think hundreds, or thousands.
> 2. packets lost on both (bge0 & bge1) interfaces

If you see the MAC statistics counter, you have the following
number of status updates and interrupts. Both numbers are same
which means the controller didn't lost interrupts for state
updates.
dev.bge.0.stats.RingStatusUpdate: 950302
dev.bge.0.stats.Interrupts: 950302
and
dev.bge.1.stats.RingStatusUpdate: 5518912
dev.bge.1.stats.Interrupts: 5518912

You received 582767 unicast packets and lost 0 packet for bge0.
dev.bge.0.stats.rx.UcastPkts: 582767
And you also received 2956515 unicast packets and lost 19 packets
for bge1.
dev.bge.1.stats.rx.Fragments: 1
dev.bge.1.stats.rx.UcastPkts: 2956515
dev.bge.1.stats.rx.FCSErrors: 18
I don't see such a large number packet drops from these MAC
statistics unless upper stack drops received packets.
I fixed some counter updates which were ignored in previous
releases so you may happen to see lost counters in recent version.

Normally you should not have any FCS errors, it could be related
with signal quality and these errors might not be correctly
counted.

> 3. packets don't lost on sources at Aug'09

Since I don't have BCM5704 hardware it's hard to find which
revision may affect to this issue. Could you narrow down which
revision number started showing the issue?