On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 09:55:54AM +0900, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:43:42AM +0400, Oleg Bulyzhin wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 02:44:34PM +0200, Michael Reifenberger wrote:
> > > On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Pyun YongHyeon wrote:
> > > ...
> > > >I'm not familiar with vge(4) and don't have hardwares supported by
> > > >vge(4). Because vge(4) supports a kind of interrupt moderation, there
> > > >is a possiblity to have the same issue seen on em(4).
> > > >If you want my blind patch I can send a patch for you.
> > > >
> > > Yes, please!
> > > I can test it (on RELENG_6 though).
> > I have an idea why those timeouts can happen. Could you please test
> > attached patch? It may help (or may not). Anyway would be fine
> > to know results.
> Since vge(4) uses MTX_RECURSE mutex and miibus(4) handler is
> protected with the mutex I guess it wouldn't help much.
> I guess it needs a seperate mutex to protect miibus(4) handler
> and should remove the use of MTX_RECURSE.
1) _ifmedia_upd() & _ifmedia_sts() functions are not called from mii layer.
2) As i can see MII layer is not protected by anything, unless you
specially acquire driver lock prior to calling mii_ function.
Locking ifmedia callbacks should be done (though, it may not help
with watchdogs timeout), otherwise we have race on accessing PHY registers.
As i can see, random watchdog timeouts was reported for em, bge, vge, sk
(and maybe others, those ones which i remember) drivers.
All of them has unlocked _ifmedia_ functions.
My idea was: perhaps, under certain condition, concurrent access to PHY could
lead to hardware deadlock.
> vge(4) also has a bug
> if mbuf chain is too long(7 or higher) and defragmentation with
> m_defrag(9) fails it would access an invalid mbuf chain.
> All these requires lots of work and need a real hardware.
> Oleg, if you have hardware, would you fix it?
Unfortunately i don't have vge hardware.
> Pyun YongHyeon