Koozali.org: home of the SME Server
Obsolete Releases => SME Server 7.x => Topic started by: fmilano on August 02, 2006, 02:26:18 AM
-
Trying to get SME7 to work with an onboard Intel 82573L nic that runs off of the ICH7-M chipset through PCI-E
The nic card cant be initialized, and in dmesg I can see "e1000 probe error -5"
Thanks
-
Trying to get SME7 to work with an onboard Intel 82573L nic
...
You're not the first to report a problem with such a NIC:
http://bugs.contribs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1123
From your description, your card is recognised by SME7, but the driver doesn't work correctly with the hardware.
I'd suggest you enable the updates testing repository, and update your system. That will install a new kernel which might work.
If not, I suggest that you just get another NIC which does work.
-
I have fixed the Intel 82573L nic problem.
You must rebuild the driver, in order for the system to recognize the nic.
Go to Intel.com and download the .tar.gz for 82573L (e1000-7.1.9.tar.gz)
You also need to download the required RPMS for your build environment. They can be found in the Centos repository.
requirements:
Files -
e1000-7.1.9.tar.gz
Build Environment -
autoconf-2.59-5.noarch.rpm
glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.98.EL.i386.rpm
automake-1.9.2-3.noarch.rpm
libstdc++-3.4.5-2.i386.rpm
cpp-3.4.5-2.i386.rpm
libstdc++-devel-3.4.5-2.i386.rpm
gcc-3.4.5-2.i386.rpm
m4-1.4.1-16.i386.rpm
gcc-c++-3.4.5-2.i386.rpm
make-3.80-5.i386.rpm
glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.19.i386.rpm
glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.19.i386.rpm
Untar/Unzip archive:
tar -zxf e1000-x.x.x.tar.gz
Change to the driver src directory:
cd e1000-x.x.x.tar.gz/src/
Compile the driver module:
make install
The binary will be installed as:
/lib/modules/<kernel version>/kernel/drivers/net/e1000/e1000.ko
reboot
Fabio
-
Hi
I hope for some help here :-)
I have a mainboard from MSI, im-945gse. It has 2 gigabit LAN, perfect for a low watt sme-server.
BUT the LAN is by Intel with an 82574L Controller and it is not configured to work during installation.
Two extra nic is not an option, so I have tried to follow the above, and this:
http://bugs.contribs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1123
At Intel I have found 2 files that might get the LAN to work:
http://downloadcenter.intel.com/filter_results.aspx?strTypes=all&ProductID=3023&OSFullName=Linux*&lang=eng&strOSs=39&submit=Go!
e1000-8.0.9.tar.gz or e1000e-0.5.18.3.tar.gz
At Centos I have found the rest of the files mentioned in bug=1123.
I have transferred the files to the server with a usb-key (no network)
But when I come to "make install" I get an error:
makefile:70: *** Linux kernel source not found in any of those locations:
makefile:71: ***
makefile:72: *** Install the appropriate kernel development package, e.g.
makefile:73: *** kernel-devel, for building kernel modules and try again. Stop
I am already way beyond known territory, but I still hope to make this work. Only other option is another serversoftware.
What is the right thing to do, to make this work?
P1ur
-
Hi
I have come a bit further
1. Downloaded
autoconf-2.59-5.noarch.rpm
automake-1.9.2-3.noarch.rpm
cpp-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
gcc-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
gcc-c++-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.41.i386.rpm
glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.41.i386.rpm
glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.103.EL.i386.rpm
libstdc++-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
libstdc++-devel-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
m4-1.4.1-16.i386.rpm
make-3.80-7.EL4.i386.rpm
from: http://mirror.centos.org/centos-4/4.7/os/i386/CentOS/RPMS/
2. Downloaded
kernel-devel-2.6.9-78.0.8.EL.i686.rpm
from http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/10424960/com/kernel-devel-2.6.9-78.0.8.EL.i686.rpm.html
3. Downloaded
e1000e-0.5.18.3.tar.gz
from: http://support.intel.com/support/network/sb/cs-006120.htm -> http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?agr=Y&DwnldID=15817
4. Copied all files to an usb-pen
5. mounted the usbdisk: (in /media/) mount usbdisk
6. copied the files to admin/home (using mc)
7. installed: yum localinstall * in the directory, where the files is located
8. Signal event post-upgrade ; signal event reboot
9. unpacked: tar -zxf e1000e-0.5.18.3.tar.gz
10 in directory e1000e-0.5.18.3/src make install
11. Reboot
etho is up and running :-)
but eth1 is not :-( - It has a MAC-adress, but the ir-nr. is 1.1.1.1.
Any ideas what to do now?
p1ur
-
Hi
I've got it up and running :-)
Started all over with a workning nic. Installed as server only behind existing sme-server.
Updated via server-manger.
Found new kernel version with uname -r - 2.6.9-78.0.13EL
Found at matching kernel-devel, so the files are now:
autoconf-2.59-5.noarch.rpm
automake-1.9.2-3.noarch.rpm
cpp-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
gcc-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
gcc-c++-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
glibc-devel-2.3.4-2.41.i386.rpm
glibc-headers-2.3.4-2.41.i386.rpm
glibc-kernheaders-2.4-9.1.103.EL.i386.rpm
libstdc++-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
libstdc++-devel-3.4.6-10.i386.rpm
m4-1.4.1-16.i386.rpm
make-3.80-7.EL4.i386.rpm
---
kernel-devel-2.6.9-78.0.13.EL.i686.rpm
e1000-7.1.9.tar.gz
Made yum localinstall *
signal-event post-upgrade; signal-event reboot
tar -zxf e1000e-0.5.18.3.tar.gz
make install in src
reboot and enable NICs in bios
Changing to a Intel Gigabit NIC, and everything works fine (both NICs)
Changing serversettings to server and gateway. So my settings looks something like this:
Internet -> server1 -> switch -> server2 -> workstation
server1 (existing server) internel IP: 192.168.1.100, DHCP: 192.169.1.36-96. Static IP to server2: 192.168.1.2
server2 (new server, with Intel Gigabit NIC): Internel IP: 192.168.1.200, DHCP: 192.168.1.236-246
Server2 settings: gateway: 192.168.1.100
Server2 gets external IP 192.168.1.2, gives ip to workstation.
BUT, there is no connection to Internet from server2 or workstation? - What have I done wrong?? (I guess it's obvious, but I can't see what)'
Secondly. I guess that the way I have made it work, will get me in trouble later, ie when the kernel is updated?
-
What subnet mask are you using? 255.255.255.128?
-
Subnet: 255.255.255.0 on both servers
Update:
And changing the subnet mask to 255.255.255.128 on server2 worked :-)
Thanx
P1ur
-
If I understand correctly, server1 is in server-gateway mode. If that is the case, either you will have to change the subnet mask on the internal interface of server1, both interfaces on server2 to 255.255.255.128. Or use a different subnet on the internal of server2.
If you change the subnet mask, valid ip adresses for the internal will be 192.168.1.1-126 on server1 and 192.168.1.129-254 on server2. What you have now with 255.255.255.0 is 192.168.1.1-254 valid on both sides of server2.
Otherwise use something like 192.168.2.X for the internal of server2 if you need to service more hosts.
-
Hi
I have forseen this problem:
Hi
...
Secondly. I guess that the way I have made it work, will get me in trouble later, ie when the kernel is updated?
And Yes, I cant update to 7.5, because of my unsupported NIC Intel 82573L, without doing something extra. :-?
So I'm going to give it a try. 8-)
The question is what to do and how.
I know that I have to download a number of files including kernel-devel and "make install"(?build new kernel?) but what files do I need? Is there a way to show the needed files?
And In what order should I do the update and the "make install"?
I know I cant make the update first (The server wont update because of missing files), but what will be the proper way to do - whatever I have to do?
Thanx in advance, I know this is not mainstream, but any help is appreciated
P1ur
-
The question is what to do and how.
Use a different NIC
Or:
Use SME8 beta.
-
Hi Charlie
Thanks for the replay. And thanks for all your work with SME/contribs.
I can use a different NIC, but only temporally, because there isn't room for a "normal" NIC in the cabinet. (and I don't want a SME-server with open cabinet)
Does SME 8beta support Intel 82573L NIC?
If yes, can I upgrade from 7.4 to 8.0? - I'm okay with upgrading to beta.
P1ur
-
Does SME 8beta support Intel 82573L NIC?
I don't know. If you try it, you can tell us :-)
-
Okay lets travel this road.
I'll try a fresh install on a spare HD. I'll be back, then there is an update.
P1ur
-
I have just installed an Intel 82574L PCIe NIC in an SME 7.4 box.
It didn't wouldn't work first up, but after a yum update it's all working fine.
I think the original post was for an 82573L.
-
I can confirm Intel 82574L is working (kernel 2.6.9-89.0.16.ELsmp).
F.
-
That is great
I have had a lot of trouble testing version 8(and never succeeded). The box has 2 sata connections and 1 ata. I only have ata spare HD's. And for some reason they never worked.
At the moment I have SME version 7.4 with a modified kernel.
I guess the best way to upgrade to 7.5 would be to take a backup, install a fresh 7.4, restore the backup and upgrade to 7.5. Am I correct, or is there a "better" way?
I have 2 sata on a raid 1. For an extra security, could it be a good idea to the the job with just the one HD?
P1ur
-
I have had a lot of trouble testing version 8(and never succeeded).
Did you report all your problems?
-
Hi'
I'm pretty sure, it has nothing to to with SME.
3 different HD's did not show up after boot, so I had nothing to install on :-?
I don't know why, and now I really don't care
I would nevertheless like a response to the previous post.
P1ur
-
p1ur
...SME version 7.4 with a modified kernel.
.....to upgrade to 7.5 would be to take a backup, install a fresh 7.4, restore the backup and upgrade to 7.5....
The easiest way to upgrade is to burn a sme7.5RC2 CD, put it into the drive of your current sme7.4 server (with mod'd kernel), and select the install/upgrade option.
Alternatively, yes you can do a backup, reinstall and upgrade, but that just seems more work to achieve the same outcome.
I have 2 sata on a raid 1. For an extra security, could it be a good idea to the the job with just the one HD?
Whether you upgrade a single disk or a RAID array should not affect the outcome, both are upgradeable.
You can pull one drive out of the array and set it aside before doing the upgrade, that way you have a safe copy.
You must ensure the drives are in sync before shutting down with
cat /proc/mdstat
-
p1ur
3 different HD's did not show up after boot, so I had nothing to install on :-?
I don't know why, and now I really don't care
Well the developers would like to know if those issues were sme related or not, that's how they build a good sme8.
It sounds more like a BIOS or basic setting issue.
I would nevertheless like a response to the previous post.
....and if we/I also took the attitude of "I really don't care", then no-one would answer your post (which I have answered).
At a wild guess, sme8 would probably resolve all your NIC issues, but you obviously need to work through your drive boot issues, please use the bugtracker to do so.
-
....and if we/I also took the attitude of "I really don't care", then no-one would answer your post ...
Indeed.
Moreover if p1ur wants an answer to a question whjch isn't about Intel 82573L nic then he/she should start a new thread rather than hijacking this one.
-
I'm pretty sure, it has nothing to to with SME.
3 different HD's did not show up after boot, so I had nothing to install on :-?
Quite clearly that is a problem with SME server software, since SME server software is the only software you want to run. SME server software needs to be able to detect and use your HD or HDs.
As Mary said, please report any problems with HDs not detected, via the bug tracker.
-
Hi'
Thanks for the answers.
About the 3 HD's that did not show up, sorry for the lack of explanation: They were never registered in bios, that's why I don't think it is an issue for this forum/bugtracker.
And the reason that I don't care is because of the previous answers that made my problems with the HD's irrelevant, now and in the future, because I'm going to buy a spare sata HD.
And the reason I don't write much in this forum is because I don't like a forum, where
"and if we/I also took the attitude of "I really don't care", then no-one would answer your post" -
"Moreover if p1ur wants an answer to a question which isn't about Intel 82573L nic then he/she should start a new thread rather than hijacking this one"
Is more the norm than it is an exception. I am curtain the HD problem has nothing to do with SME, hence no bug. English is not my native language, and I often get misunderstood. I have been in this tread almost from the start, and the "I really don't care" refears only to my own problem with a spare HD. Sorry for the last bit. I don't like reading it, and I don't like writing it, but I guess I have to. So I guess if I'd cared a little less, I would write some more.