From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Tue Aug 4 15:54:52 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 319933781EE for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:54:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jclarke@marcuscom.com) Received: from creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (creme-brulee.marcuscom.com [IPv6:2607:fc50:1:f300::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.marcuscom.com", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BLfTR5335z4WpY; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:54:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jclarke@marcuscom.com) Received: from rtp-jclarke-nitro9.cisco.com ([173.38.117.79]) (authenticated bits=0) by creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 074FsBbI030503 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Aug 2020 11:54:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jclarke@marcuscom.com) X-Authentication-Warning: creme-brulee.marcuscom.com: Host [173.38.117.79] claimed to be rtp-jclarke-nitro9.cisco.com From: Joe Clarke Message-Id: <8C3F951C-F422-40E2-ACE6-0DF6844D78E4@marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\)) Subject: Re: Traffic "corruption" in 12-stable Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 11:54:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20200804155113.GF59704@raichu> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org To: Mark Johnston References: <9FAE54DE-F409-4A53-B91E-59AE52A86513@marcuscom.com> <20200727190147.GC59953@raichu> <2F974A4E-95B3-4C65-A5F8-6FBBB575B756@marcuscom.com> <3F5D4874-C8D6-4D77-AE9F-D5EAB750DDB4@marcuscom.com> <20200804155113.GF59704@raichu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1) X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.7 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, RDNS_NONE, TW_MX, TW_VM autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on creme-brulee.marcuscom.com X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BLfTR5335z4WpY X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of jclarke@marcuscom.com has no SPF policy when checking 2607:fc50:1:f300::2) smtp.mailfrom=jclarke@marcuscom.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.96 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[marcuscom.com]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.39)[-0.387]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.28)[-0.278]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.22)[0.225]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:2607:fc50::/36, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.33 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 15:54:52 -0000 > On Aug 4, 2020, at 11:51, Mark Johnston wrote: >=20 > On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 05:22:37PM -0400, Joe Clarke wrote: >>> On Jul 27, 2020, at 15:41, Joe Clarke wrote: >>>> On Jul 27, 2020, at 15:01, Mark Johnston wrote: >>>> There are some fixes for vmx not present in stable/12 (yet). I did = a >>>> merge of a number of outstanding revisions. Would you be able to = test >>>> the patch? I haven't observed any problems with it on a host using = igb, >>>> but I have no ability to test vmx at the moment. >>>=20 >>> I=E2=80=99m down to test anything. I did notice quite a few vmxnet3 = changes around performance that appealed to me. I tried a few of them = on my last kernel. That took much longer to exhibit the problem, but = eventually did. >>>=20 >>> I can tell you I don=E2=80=99t have all of these patches in, though. = I=E2=80=99ll build with this diff and start running it now. I=E2=80=99ll= let you know how it goes. >>=20 >> So it=E2=80=99s been just over a week of runtime with this full patch = set. I have seen no further issues with ingress packet = =E2=80=9Ctruncation=E2=80=9D, and performance has been what I expect. = I=E2=80=99m going to keep running, but I think this seems like a good = set to MFC. >=20 > Done in r363844, thanks. Thank you. On day 8, and still no issues. Joe --- PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc