From: Mark Jackson <mpfj-list@newflow.co.uk>
To: Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@ti.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Dual EMAC mode implementation of CPSW
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:01:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <517018E6.6080108@newflow.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <516C3A0D.70903@ti.com>
On 15/04/13 18:34, Mugunthan V N wrote:
> On 4/15/2013 10:58 PM, Mark Jackson wrote:
>> On 15/04/13 18:07, Mugunthan V N wrote:
>>> On 4/15/2013 12:46 AM, Mark Jackson wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Notice that at the end, the nfs link appears to come back "ok", but
>>>> the "ps" command never completes.
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas of what's going on ?
>>>
>>> I have tried ping on both the interface fine. Will verify with ps again
>>> later in this week.
>>> Can you provide below details details
>>> - Are you using EVMsk or custom build EVM?
>>
>> This is a custom board (based on the BeagleBone design) with dual
>> Ethernet, NAND, NOR and FRAM.
>>
>> The dual emac thing is (one of) the last things to get signed off, so
>> I'm willing to assist in tracking this down.
>
> After testing the scenario i may be able to send you an update later in
> this week.
I have made some progress ... I realised I was missing a (clearly rather
important !!) item in my .config file, namely CONFIG_TI_DAVINCI_EMAC.
I am now able to ping from our board to other systems on the network
(again, I've only tested eth0 at the moment).
However, I am unable to ping everything I should be able to !!
Here's my setup ...
# cat /etc/network/interfaces
# Configure Loopback
auto lo eth0 eth1
iface lo inet loopback
iface eth1 inet static
address 10.1.101.111
netmask 255.255.0.0
gateway 10.1.0.1
iface eth0 inet static
address 10.0.101.111
netmask 255.255.0.0
gateway 10.0.0.1
# ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr C2:21:5E:B4:06:5E
inet addr:10.0.101.111 Bcast:0.0.0.0 Mask:255.255.0.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:67 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:62 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:8848 (8.6 KiB) TX bytes:4290 (4.1 KiB)
Interrupt:56
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr D6:2F:CF:39:22:4E
inet addr:10.1.101.111 Bcast:0.0.0.0 Mask:255.255.0.0
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:65536 Metric:1
RX packets:38 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:38 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:4022 (3.9 KiB) TX bytes:4022 (3.9 KiB)
# route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use
Iface
0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 eth0
10.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
10.1.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 U 0 0 0 eth1
I can ping a couple of units on 10.0.0.x ...
# ping 10.0.0.120
PING 10.0.0.120 (10.0.0.120): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 10.0.0.120: seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.955 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.120: seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.676 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.120: seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.732 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.120: seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.762 ms
--- 10.0.0.120 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 0.676/0.781/0.955 ms
# ping 10.0.0.5
PING 10.0.0.5 (10.0.0.5): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 10.0.0.5: seq=0 ttl=64 time=1.815 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.5: seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.458 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.5: seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.474 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.5: seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.345 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.5: seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.329 ms
--- 10.0.0.5 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 0.329/0.684/1.815 ms
But *not* my router on the same subnet ...
# ping 10.0.0.1
PING 10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
--- 10.0.0.1 ping statistics ---
15 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss
I am also unable to ping other equipment that exists:-
# ping 10.0.101.2
PING 10.0.101.2 (10.0.101.2): 56 data bytes
--- 10.0.101.2 ping statistics ---
6 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss
# ping 10.0.200.2
PING 10.0.200.2 (10.0.200.2): 56 data bytes
--- 10.0.200.2 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss
Just to prove these other item do exist, here's me pinging them from
another Linux VM (working off the same physical switch):-
mpfj@mpfj-nanobone:~/linux/linux-2.6$ ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 08:00:27:1e:0d:f5
inet addr:10.0.0.120 Bcast:10.0.255.255 Mask:255.255.0.0
inet6 addr: fe80::a00:27ff:fe1e:df5/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:135935 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:172692 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:109340858 (109.3 MB) TX bytes:177519151 (177.5 MB)
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:3771 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:3771 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:294818 (294.8 KB) TX bytes:294818 (294.8 KB)
mpfj@mpfj-nanobone:~/linux/linux-2.6$ ping 10.0.0.1
PING 10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_req=1 ttl=255 time=0.453 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_req=2 ttl=255 time=0.445 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_req=3 ttl=255 time=0.488 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_req=4 ttl=255 time=0.471 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_req=5 ttl=255 time=0.460 ms
^C
--- 10.0.0.1 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3998ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.445/0.463/0.488/0.024 ms
mpfj@mpfj-nanobone:~/linux/linux-2.6$ ping 10.0.200.2
PING 10.0.200.2 (10.0.200.2) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.200.2: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=2.09 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.200.2: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=1.17 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.200.2: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.994 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.200.2: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.920 ms
^C
--- 10.0.200.2 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.920/1.296/2.095/0.471 ms
mpfj@mpfj-nanobone:~/linux/linux-2.6$ ping 10.0.101.2
PING 10.0.101.2 (10.0.101.2) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.101.2: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.48 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.101.2: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.939 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.101.2: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.946 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.101.2: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=1.04 ms
^C
--- 10.0.101.2 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.939/1.104/1.483/0.223 ms
When the pings fail, I am unable to see *any* activity on the network
(using wireshark).
Is there anything else I should try ?
Cheers
Mark J.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-18 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-11 19:52 [PATCH 0/3] Dual EMAC mode implementation of CPSW Mugunthan V N
2013-02-11 19:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] driver: net: ethernet: davinci_cpdma: add support for directed packet and source port detection Mugunthan V N
2013-02-11 19:52 ` [PATCH 2/3] driver: net: ethernet: cpsw: make cpts as pointer Mugunthan V N
2013-02-11 19:52 ` [PATCH 3/3] driver: net: ethernet: cpsw: dual emac interface implementation Mugunthan V N
[not found] ` <1360612340-9266-4-git-send-email-mugunthanvnm-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
2013-02-18 13:36 ` Peter Korsgaard
[not found] ` <87mwv1kaln.fsf-D6SC8u56vOOJDPpyT6T3/w@public.gmane.org>
2013-02-18 15:10 ` Mugunthan V N
2013-04-14 19:20 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-15 17:04 ` Mugunthan V N
2013-02-12 21:15 ` [PATCH 0/3] Dual EMAC mode implementation of CPSW David Miller
2013-04-12 9:14 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-14 19:16 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-15 17:07 ` Mugunthan V N
2013-04-15 17:28 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-15 17:34 ` Mugunthan V N
2013-04-15 18:00 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-16 11:09 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-18 16:01 ` Mark Jackson [this message]
2013-04-22 14:07 ` Mark Jackson
2013-04-22 17:01 ` Mugunthan V N
2013-04-23 5:11 ` Mark Jackson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=517018E6.6080108@newflow.co.uk \
--to=mpfj-list@newflow.co.uk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mugunthanvnm@ti.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).