Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:14:19 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Tillman <tillman@seekingfire.com> Cc: sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sparc slowdown - problem identified... Message-ID: <20030816051419.GA32579@dhcp42.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20030815223159.F22214@seekingfire.com> References: <20030815121010.I97608@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20030815135034.GA701@crow.dom2ip.de> <20030815080055.O22214@seekingfire.com> <20030815143404.GB701@crow.dom2ip.de> <20030815110221.T22214@seekingfire.com> <20030815223159.F22214@seekingfire.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 10:31:59PM -0600, Tillman wrote: > > hme0: <Sun HME 10/100 Ethernet> mem 0xe0000000-0xe0007fff at device 1.1 on pci1 > hme0: Ethernet address: 08:00:20:c6:7f:c7 > > hme1: <Sun HME 10/100 Ethernet> mem 0x2800000-0x2807fff at device 0.1 on pci3 > hme1: Ethernet address: 08:00:20:c6:7f:c7 > > arp: 192.168.23.3 is on hme0 but got reply from 00:10:4b:69:2a:86 on hme1 > arp: 192.168.23.3 is on hme0 but got reply from 00:10:4b:69:2a:86 on hme1 > arp: 192.168.23.3 is on hme0 but got reply from 00:10:4b:69:2a:86 on hme1 > > Any ideas? Both hme0 and hme1 have the same MAC address. Suspicious... > Is it possible that the hme interfaces are numbered in a > different order with the new kernel, similar to how the disk devices > could have been renumbered (but that wasn't an issue for me)? Yes, definitely. When you enable OFW_NEWPCI, compare the old dmesg(8) with the new one to see what has changed and correct your setup accordingly. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030816051419.GA32579>