Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:21:00 -0500 From: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org> To: Marat N.Afanasyev <amarat@ksu.ru> Cc: Victor Balada Diaz <victor@bsdes.net>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com> Subject: Re: interrupt storm on MSI IXP600 based motherboards Message-ID: <045DAFBB-ACAA-4C43-8A31-38C37D78E586@langille.org> In-Reply-To: <497A1BAF.9090502@ksu.ru> References: <E1LNnFa-0003ze-7k@dilbert.ticketswitch.com> <49774BAE.3000809@ksu.ru> <20090122071845.GF4881@alf.bsdes.net> <4978A10A.9060006@langille.org> <7697CDAB-B4E7-480A-B31A-1F54275B8D54@langille.org> <497A1BAF.9090502@ksu.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 23, 2009, at 2:34 PM, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote: > Dan Langille wrote: >> On Jan 22, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Dan Langille wrote: >>> Victor Balada Diaz wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 07:22:06PM +0300, Marat N.Afanasyev wrote: >>>>>>> trouble with onboard re(4) was resolved in -CURRENT and - >>>>>>> STABLE, but storms are not bound to ethernet only. storm may >>>>>>> appear on any device. if any device generates enough >>>>>>> interrupts rate, storm will arrive. >>>>>> Yes, I just got another storm, on my ATA controller this time. Ah >>>>>> well, so much for the idea of disabling unneeded devices! >>>>>> >>>>>> -pete. >>>>>> >>>>> it's a kind of magic, really. I built a new kernel with KDB and >>>>> DDB and after 1 day, 13:15 I'm still waiting for storm to >>>>> arrive. And I added >>>>> hw.acpi.osname="Linux" to /boot/loader.conf. >>>> Try doing lots of IO and you will get the problem soon. You might >>>> want to try: >>>> while true; do dd if=/dev/zero of=BAH bs=1M count=1024; sync; done >>> >>> FWIW, last night I changed the address of the comm port IO in my >>> BIOS. Then I ran the Bacula regression test suite (lots of IO). >>> For my machine, once the interrupt storm starts, it continues. I >>> do not know if that happens to everyone. >>> >>> Since changing the address, I have had no interrupt storms. I have >>> been running the above IO loop for about ten minutes. >>> >>> No storm yet (knock on wood). >> And it's back: >> Jan 22 17:21:46 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; >> throttling interrupt source >> Jan 22 17:23:19 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; >> throttling interrupt source >> Jan 22 17:28:20 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; >> throttling interrupt source >> Jan 22 17:33:20 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; >> throttling interrupt source >> Jan 22 17:38:20 polo kernel: interrupt storm detected on "irq22:"; >> throttling interrupt source >> I shall try the hw.acpi.osname="Linux" option now. >> From dmsg: Jan 22 18:10:07 polo kernel: ACPI: Overriding _OS >> definition with "Linux" > > it works for me for 3 days, 16:27 and still no sign of interrupt > storm. and emu10kx0 generates as many as 93 interrupt per second > without trouble. > > What is your situation? The box has rebooted twice tonight. The first time, it was running the "while true; do dd..." script. The second time, it was not. The box is now up responding to pings, but I cannot ssh to it. I can't get to the console until Monday. -- Dan Langille http://langille.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?045DAFBB-ACAA-4C43-8A31-38C37D78E586>