Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:43:06 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org> To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: inpcb/inpcbinfo rwlocking: coming to a 7-STABLE branch near you Message-ID: <20080813214306.GA28953@eos.sc1.parodius.com> In-Reply-To: <200808132135.m7DLZTeK039233@lava.sentex.ca> References: <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808031142550.65130@fledge.watson.org> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808082219360.16028@fledge.watson.org> <200808120059.m7C0xvUH028011@lava.sentex.ca> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808121119040.86332@fledge.watson.org> <200808132034.m7DKY7wm038972@lava.sentex.ca> <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808132138170.41778@fledge.watson.org> <7.1.0.9.0.20080813164157.161ba2e8@sentex.net> <200808132116.m7DLGY1f039165@lava.sentex.ca> <20080813212544.GA25915@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <200808132135.m7DLZTeK039233@lava.sentex.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 05:35:21PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 05:25 PM 8/13/2008, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> > >> > I will try a kernel before the em changes, as thats the only other thing >> > I can think of off the top of my head. > > I commented out em from the kernel and loaded up a previous version via > kld, but still the same thing, although not nearly as much > > 0[smtp2]# arp -na | wc > 89 680 5081 > 0[smtp2]# > > em0@pci0:0:4:0: class=0x020000 card=0x387010f1 chip=0x10768086 rev=0x05 > hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82541EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[dc] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 07[e4] = PCI-X supports 2048 burst read, 1 split transaction > em1@pci0:0:5:0: class=0x020000 card=0x387010f1 chip=0x10768086 rev=0x05 > hdr=0x00 > vendor = 'Intel Corporation' > device = '82541EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller' > class = network > subclass = ethernet > cap 01[dc] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 > cap 07[e4] = PCI-X supports 2048 burst read, 1 split transaction > >> That almost looks like some kind of ARP storm, sans repetitive entries >> (that definitely looks odd). Does tcpdump on em1 show a particular >> machine or router demanding MACs for 64.7.153.0/24 (or whatever the >> block is)? > > No, its very, very quiet. All the other machines on the 2 networks are > just fine. > > Any suggestions on what kernel to go back to start from ? Seems relevant, and might give you some dates/revisions to roll back to for testing. Robert will have to confirm if some of the below commits could wreck havok -- I'm not familiar with the code, I just pay semi-close attention to the commits... :-) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/if_ether.c -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080813214306.GA28953>