Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:53:16 -0700
From:      Sean Bruno <seanbru@yahoo-inc.com>
To:        "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Cc:        davidch@freebsd.org, Pyun YongHyeon <yongari@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: bce(4) with IPMI
Message-ID:  <1317343996.2777.33.camel@hitfishpass-lx.corp.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1317323418.2777.14.camel@hitfishpass-lx.corp.yahoo.com>
References:  <1317315666.2777.8.camel@hitfishpass-lx.corp.yahoo.com> <1317323418.2777.14.camel@hitfishpass-lx.corp.yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 12:10 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 10:01 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > We've been getting reports of odd behavior on our Dell R410 machines
> > when trying to use IPMI.  The servers have two NIC's that we have
> > assigned as the IPMI interface(bce0) and production interface(bce1)
> > respectively.
> > 
> > Since we don't actually configure bce0 in FreeBSD, we've found that the
> > IPMI interface deactivated when bce(4) loads.  I assume that the driver
> > is not initializing the interface correctly in this case and the default
> > case is to turn the interface off.  Does it make sense to completely
> > turn off the interface when there is an active link on the port, but no
> > configuration assigned?
> > 
> > Sean
> > 
> > p.s. Dell's IPMI implementation is ... um ... more difficult than it
> > needs to be.
> > 
> 
> I should probably say, this is freebsd7.  So I'll peruse the changelogs
> and see if 7 is missing something here.
> 
> sean

commenting this change out seems to be helping quite a bit with my
issue.  I think that this behavior may be wrong in the IPMI shared/nic
case.  Thoughts?

http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/dev/bce/if_bce.c?r1=210261&r2=210263




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1317343996.2777.33.camel>