Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?

stephenw10

Hmm, have either of you tried FreeBSD directly?

That should be no different but....

slk2k

Now that the system has been in place for a long weekend, I checked the stats and nothing is unusual - no missed packets. Things looks reasonably well (other than a crap-ton of interrupts, but that's because all the HW offloading is turned off).

/root: sysctl -a dev.igc.0
dev.igc.0.interrupts.rx_desc_min_thresh: 0
dev.igc.0.interrupts.asserts: 59793578
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tso_txd: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_1024_1522: 29552898
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_512_1023: 337783
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_256_511: 2041523
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_128_255: 867472
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_65_127: 11716942
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_64: 9123432
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_txd: 67
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_txd: 268
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_txd: 53640050
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_txd: 53640050
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_octets_txd: 47517179206
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_octets_recvd: 94980575076
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_1024_1522: 61648203
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_512_1023: 760161
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_256_511: 1040034
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_128_255: 1551643
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_65_127: 6856810
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_64: 15037895
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_recvd: 128920
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_recvd: 623916
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_recvd: 86894746
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_recvd: 86894746
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xoff_txd: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xoff_recvd: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xon_txd: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.xon_recvd: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.alignment_errs: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.crc_errs: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_errs: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_jabber: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_oversize: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_fragmented: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_undersize: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.missed_packets: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.defer_count: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.sequence_errors: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.symbol_errors: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.collision_count: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.late_coll: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.multiple_coll: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.single_coll: 0
dev.igc.0.mac_stats.excess_coll: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_3.rx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_3.rxd_tail: 287
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_3.rxd_head: 288
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_2.rx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_2.rxd_tail: 374
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_2.rxd_head: 375
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_1.rx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_1.rxd_tail: 165
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_1.rxd_head: 166
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_0.rx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_0.rxd_tail: 363
dev.igc.0.queue_rx_0.rxd_head: 364
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_3.tx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_3.txd_tail: 647
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_3.txd_head: 647
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_2.tx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_2.txd_tail: 789
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_2.txd_head: 789
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_1.tx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_1.txd_tail: 754
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_1.txd_head: 754
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_0.tx_irq: 0
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_0.txd_tail: 294
dev.igc.0.queue_tx_0.txd_head: 294
dev.igc.0.fc_low_water: 32752
dev.igc.0.fc_high_water: 32768
dev.igc.0.rx_control: 71335966
dev.igc.0.device_control: 404489793
dev.igc.0.watchdog_timeouts: 0
dev.igc.0.rx_overruns: 0
dev.igc.0.link_irq: 2
dev.igc.0.dropped: 0
dev.igc.0.eee_control: 1
dev.igc.0.itr: 488
dev.igc.0.tx_abs_int_delay: 66
dev.igc.0.rx_abs_int_delay: 66
dev.igc.0.tx_int_delay: 66
dev.igc.0.rx_int_delay: 0
dev.igc.0.rs_dump: 0

But my thruput seems off. My previous modem and connection I would get a higher thruput on the speedtest (like 940M down, 42M up). Now I can't test higher than 860M down, 36M up). Might have more to do with the modem as much as the NIC ports. I get the same directly connected to the modem.

Setarcos

@stephenw10 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

Hmm, have either of you tried FreeBSD directly?

That should be no different but....

I have not, but a fair comparison would include both vanilla FreeBSD 12.2 with the igc driver added and a Linux kernel 5.10+ based distro with a variety of I225-LM and I225-V hardware. I just don't have the physical hardware to test this out in my homelab.

stephenw10

I would test with any FreeBSD version that has the driver just to know if it works at all there. That looks like only Main right now: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/tree/main/sys/dev/igc
So I'd test a snapshot.

Steve

bk150

Wow I'm glad i found this post. I have 2 of the QNAP I225-LM cards installed with pfsense 2.5.2 and the DNS resolver wasn't working on a fresh install. I was absolutely tearing my hair out trying to figure out why it wasn't working (blaming my AT&T fiber gateway that I'm forced to use...).

ipv6 also wasn't working using DHCPv6 prefix delegation. The WAN interface I225-LM could get an address but none of the clients on my LAN interface I225-LM network could.

Using two integrated I-211 and I-219 gigabit controllers on the motherboard yields no such issues. Let me know if there is anything specific that anyone wants me to test while I still have the 2 troublesome I225-LM cards.

Edit: I reinstalled 2.5.2 and disabled hardware offloading and now everything is working great.

Setarcos

I am not sure if it matters, but both @bk150 and @slk2k are using CE 2.5.2 and I am using Plus 21.05. @jerseymike what were you running when you did your test with the single port QNAP I225-LM cards?

jerseymike

@setarcos I'm running CE 2.5.2

stephenw10

@bk150 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

I reinstalled 2.5.2 and disabled hardware offloading and now everything is working great.

Hardware Checksum Offloading? Using the GUI checkbox?

bk150

@stephenw10 Correct. I did a fresh install of 2.5.2 and DNS resolution was not working. I then (slowly) navigated to the GUI in System > Advanced > Networking and disabled hardware checksum offloading.

It prompted me to reboot and after the reboot, DNS was working as expected and the GUI was no longer slow.

Edit: IPv6 is also working completely as expected.

silvercharge

I have the single port version of the QNAP Intel i225-LM running on bare metal 2.5.2 CE. Reading this thread, it seems that Intel i225-LM is supported. Any known reason or thoughts why the igc drivers are not loaded and interface is not recognized on my install? Model of card is QXG-2G1T-I225.

Thank you.

none2@pci0:4:0:0:       class=0x020000 card=0xc0011baa chip=0x15f28086 rev=0x03 hdr=0x00
    vendor     = 'Intel Corporation'
    device     = 'Intel(R) Ethernet Controller I225-LM'
    class      = network
    subclass   = ethernet

stephenw10

Looks identical to the one shown here: https://forum.netgate.com/post/993924
Check the boot log for errors when the driver tries to attach.

Steve

silvercharge

@stephenw10 Found something pretty interesting...

May be a red herring. I do have an onboard intel NIC that was loading fine as em0. I have since disabled it. Error persists whether the onboard nic is enabled or disabled in the bios.

igc0: <Intel(R) PRO/1000 PCI-Express Network Driver> mem 0xe1b00000-0xe1bfffff,0xe1c00000-0xe1c03fff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci3
igc0: Setup of Shared code failed, error -2
igc0: IFDI_ATTACH_PRE failed 6
device_attach: igc0 attach returned 6

silvercharge

@silvercharge There seems to be some type incompatibility between a quad port Broadcom card and the I225-LM installed. When the Broadcom's link state is down, then the igc0 driver can load successfully.

stephenw10

Hmm, curious. So it works with the Broadcom NIC still installed but simply not linked?

But, yes, that's some low level failure preventing the driver attaching.

Steve

silvercharge

@stephenw10 Agree. Although I have all offloading is disabled in 2.5.2 CEA, a quick search show similar complaints over the years (e.g. intel & broadcom incompatibly).

stephenw10

Yeah, no amount of offload disabling is doing to help if the driver doesn't attach.

stephenw10

Anyone able to test this in a 2.6 snapshot?

It looks like 2.5.2 missed this fix for UDP checksum offloading.
That is in 2.6.

Steve

bk150

@stephenw10 I'll throw the 2.6 snapshot on a flash drive and test it right now.

Edit: It looks like everything works with the I225-LM NICs on the 2020806 build. Upon fresh installation, DNS and IPv6 were working without making any changes. I navigated to System > Advanced > Networking and verified that the disable hardware checksum offloading option was not checked.

I'm about to head out of town soon so let me know if you want anything specific checked. Otherwise I can dig further early next week.

slk2k

@bk150

Did you have anything in the HW things disabled (Checksum, TSO, LRO)??

Thanks!

stephenw10

TSO and LRO should be disabled by default anyway.

@bk150 said in Intel Ethernet Controller I225-LM Support?:

verified that the disable hardware checksum offloading option was not checked.

So that's all the offloading option at their defaults should work in 2.6.

Steve