Traffic shaper reload fails due to vmx & ALTQ incompatibility



  • Running 2.4.0-BETA built on Thu Dec 08 05:28:44 CST 2016 in an ESXi 6 VM with VMXNET3 NICs.

    I created a basic traffic shaper with 1 WAN, 1 LAN, 85 Mbps for each.  No other options except VoIP server at to 1.2.3.4 just to create the floating rules.  When I tried to finish up, the reload failed with:

    There were error(s) loading the rules: pfctl: vmx0: driver does not support altq - The line in question reads [0]:

    Since when does ALTQ not support VMXNET3?



  • I found this as well while trying to test 2.4 and restoring a full backup from my 2.3.2_1 system.  I'm using ESXi 6.5.

    I can't find a bug report in redmine.  Did you manage to fix this?


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    @KOM:

    Since when does ALTQ not support VMXNET3?

    Strike that, reverse it: VMXNET3 doesn't support ALTQ
    (ALTQ support for NICs happens in the driver NIC, not in ALTQ)

    https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/7066



  • I wonder if it's due to this change in FreeBSD11:

    Tx/Rx multiqueue support has been added to the VMware VMXNET3 Virtual Interface Controller device (r263259)

    Found here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD11

    While poking around in the FreeBSD bug system I found this bug report that is related to IGB network drivers: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208409

    This comment is the interesting one:

    Multiqueue on igb is incompatible with ALTQ.  When building a kernel with ALTQ support, it must be disabled or queues may not be assigned to an igb interface.  The patch simply automates this dependency.

    https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208409#c3

    I'm wondering if the same is now true for the VMXNET3 drivers and multiqueue support will need to be disabled if ALTQ support is to continue?





  • guys when you testing altq from command line what is the path to the pf.conf?


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    It's in /tmp/rules.debug



  • This seems to be fixed in the latest builds.  VMXNET3 single queue support needed to be enabled overriding the new multiqueue additions in the driver.



  • This seems to be fixed in the latest builds.

    Confirmed.



  • The VLAN driver for the official ADI hardware is still afflicted with the ALTQ issue. SG-4860 here.

    I raised it a while ago.

    Still not fixed.

    I'm guessing it's the same story with multiqueue needing to be disabled.



  • @oben:

    The VLAN driver for the official ADI hardware is still afflicted with the ALTQ issue. SG-4860 here.

    I raised it a while ago.

    Still not fixed.

    I'm guessing it's the same story with multiqueue needing to be disabled.

    Raised it how.  I looked back through your posts and I can only see one forum thread where you complained about a problem and gave no details.

    This bug was fixed because we raised a bug report here: https://redmine.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/issues

    Reporting issues in the forum won't necessarily get noticed by the development team.  Raise an issue on Redmine and someone will have a look at it and try to fix your problem.



  • @gsiemon:

    @oben:

    The VLAN driver for the official ADI hardware is still afflicted with the ALTQ issue. SG-4860 here.

    I raised it a while ago.

    Still not fixed.

    I'm guessing it's the same story with multiqueue needing to be disabled.

    Raised it how.  I looked back through your posts and I can only see one forum thread where you complained about a problem and gave no details.

    This bug was fixed because we raised a bug report here: https://redmine.pfsense.org/projects/pfsense/issues

    Reporting issues in the forum won't necessarily get noticed by the development team.  Raise an issue on Redmine and someone will have a look at it and try to fix your problem.

    Not everyone is interested or motivated enough to get into the software development system. I have an account here that I relay pfsense related things.

    I don't want to create another account to add to the hundreds needed these days.

    You would think that there would be one company person who could relay these things to the right people or system to bring it to the attention of them.

    The thread I posted has all the info I can provide and posting it on redmine wont make it suddenly more detailed than what I have posted here.

    What is the sense in duplicating my efforts?

    Is the forum here just to frivolously talk?



  • @oben:

    Not everyone is interested or motivated enough to get into the software development system. I have an account here that I relay pfsense related things.

    I don't want to create another account to add to the hundreds needed these days.

    You would think that there would be one company person who could relay these things to the right people or system to bring it to the attention of them.

    The thread I posted has all the info I can provide and posting it on redmine wont make it suddenly more detailed than what I have posted here.

    What is the sense in duplicating my efforts?

    Is the forum here just to frivolously talk?

    Please don't shoot the messenger.  The official way of reporting bugs/issues/feature request is via redmine.  BTW That is not the software development system, its a database for tracking bugs.  The forum is for support and should be used to ensure that issues are verified before going into the bug reporting system which you did.  You need to take the next step if you want the bug to be resolved.  If you don't want to use it, that's fine, but don't complain when your issue isn't fixed.  In the time it took you to post the above in two separate threads, you could have had a new issue posted in redmine.

    I guess when it comes down to it, if you want to run the betas and want to get things fixed then you have an obligation to use the tools/processes provided to get those bugs fixed.  If not then maybe stick to the release versions.


Log in to reply