----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian J. Conway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:13 AM
Subject: Re: Periodic xl watchdog timeouts on 6.2-RELEASE

> On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:22:44 -0800
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have found with some of the intel MBs that the latest BIOS update
> > actually causes trouble.  Don't be afraid to try back-flashing to an
> > older BIOS update.  Intel has all the BIOS versions up on their site for
> > each board.
> >
> > Ted
> Tried a few things in the past couple days:
> - Set the interfaces to not auto-negotiate and hard-coded them: No change.
> - Tried the past 3 BIOS revisions I had been using previously: No change.
> Next up, started swapping around cards.  I noticed that one of my 3 3c905C
> cards hadn't been giving the watchdog timeout errors that I could
> remember, even though I'm doubting 2/3 of my previously-good cards are
> actually bad, but I kept that one at xl1 and tried a good 3c905B as xl0.
> This worked a little differently, now instead of watchdog timeouts, on the
> previously-normal xl1 I get:
> Mar 15 05:56:51 imogen kernel: xl1: transmission error: 90
> Mar 15 05:56:51 imogen kernel: xl1: tx underrun, increasing tx start
> threshold to 120 bytes
> I know it's *technically* an informational message and not a problem, I'm
> a perfectionist and would prefer it not to be there.

I didn't know you had multiple 3com cards so I didn't mention this earlier,
but you will find the 3com cards with the WHITE label on the card to work
better than the ones with the YELLOW label.  It's a chipset revision thing.
It also happens under some versions of Linux.

The underrun error is perfectly fine and can be ignored.  I have gotten them
myself with no ill effects.  You will not be able to fix this message.  It
will go
away once the driver has increased the buffer enough.


freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to