[Bug 268490] [igb] [lagg] [vlan]: Intel i210 performance severely degraded

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=268490

--- Comment #16 from Daniel Duerr <duerrd561@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Franco Fichtner from comment #15)

Thanks. Unfortunately I cannot get any change in behavior with this flag.

[root@nfs dd]# ifconfig
igb0: flags=28943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST,PPROMISC>
metric 0 mtu 9000
        options=800028<VLAN_MTU,JUMBO_MTU>
        ether 00:25:90:d6:e6:72
        media: Ethernet 1000baseT <full-duplex>
        status: active
        nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
igb1: flags=28943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST,PPROMISC>
metric 0 mtu 9000
        options=800028<VLAN_MTU,JUMBO_MTU>
        ether 00:25:90:d6:e6:72
        hwaddr 00:25:90:d6:e6:73
        media: Ethernet 1000baseT <full-duplex>
        status: active
        nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
lagg0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu
9000
        options=800028<VLAN_MTU,JUMBO_MTU>
        ether 00:25:90:d6:e6:72
        laggproto lacp lagghash l2,l3,l4
        laggport: igb0 flags=1c<ACTIVE,COLLECTING,DISTRIBUTING>
        laggport: igb1 flags=1c<ACTIVE,COLLECTING,DISTRIBUTING>
        groups: lagg
        media: Ethernet autoselect
        status: active
        nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
lagg0.8: flags=28943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST,PPROMISC>
metric 0 mtu 9000
        ether 00:25:90:d6:e6:72
        inet 172.27.6.135 netmask 0xfffffff0 broadcast 172.27.6.143
        groups: vlan
        vlan: 8 vlanpcp: 0 parent interface: lagg0
        media: Ethernet autoselect
        status: active
        nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>

Also, I don't believe this machine's interfaces would ever have been in PROMISC
mode before. I get that there was a change about some implicit defaults, but if
I had seen PROMISC and or PPROMISC in the `ifconfig` output before, I would
have thought something was wrong. :). Just saying, as even if this workaround
had worked, I wouldn't have considered this a normal running state.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.